Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
$3.95<br />
August 2009<br />
<strong>Northwest</strong><br />
<strong>Chess</strong>
<strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong><br />
August 2009, Volume 63,08 Issue 740<br />
ISSN Publication 0146-6941<br />
Published monthly by the <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Board.<br />
Office of record: 3310 25th Ave S, Seattle, WA 98144<br />
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to:<br />
<strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong>, PO Box 84746,<br />
Seattle WA 98124-6046.<br />
Periodicals Postage Paid at Seattle, WA<br />
USPS periodicals postage permit number (0422-390)<br />
NWC Staff<br />
Editor: Ralph Dubisch,<br />
editor@nwchess.com<br />
Publisher: Duane Polich,<br />
publisher@nwchess.com<br />
Business Manager: Eric Holcomb,<br />
eric@holcomb.com<br />
Board Representatives<br />
David Yoshinaga, Karl Schoffstoll,<br />
Duane Polich & James Stripes<br />
Entire contents copyright 2009 by <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong>.<br />
All rights reserved. Published opinions are those of the<br />
contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of<br />
the editor or the <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Board.<br />
Advertising Rates<br />
Display ads run $150 for a full page, $100 for<br />
tournament ads; $85 for a half-page, $60 for<br />
tournament ads; $50 for a quarter page, $30 for an<br />
eighth of a page, and $20 for a business card-size<br />
ad. Additional charges apply if the staff must do<br />
layout work. A 15% discount is available for two<br />
or more consecutive ads of the same size.<br />
Event Announcement Rates<br />
Each appearance in the Future Events listings<br />
costs $20. Please arrange payment for<br />
ads and Grand Prix fees with the Business<br />
Manager.<br />
Advertising & Copy Deadline<br />
Ads and submissions must be received by the<br />
10th of the month for the items to appear in the<br />
next issue (e.g., no later than August 10 for<br />
the September issue).<br />
Submit all ads, payments, and<br />
subscriptions to:<br />
Business Manager, <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong><br />
Eric Holcomb<br />
1900 NE Third St, Ste 106-361<br />
Bend OR 97701-3889<br />
Eric@Holcomb.com<br />
www.nwchess.com<br />
Submissions<br />
Submissions of games, stories, photos, art, and<br />
other original chess-related content are<br />
encouraged! Multiple submissions are<br />
acceptable; please indicate if material is<br />
non-exclusive. All submissions are subject<br />
to editing or revision. Send via U.S. mail to:<br />
<strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong><br />
Duane Polich, Publisher<br />
PO Box 37, Bellevue, WA 98008<br />
or via e-mail to:<br />
editor@nwchess.com<br />
Page 3:<br />
Page 4:<br />
Page 5:<br />
Page 8:<br />
Page 12:<br />
Page 16:<br />
Page 22:<br />
Page 24:<br />
Page 28:<br />
Page 30:<br />
Page 31:<br />
Page 32:<br />
Cover art: Russell Miller<br />
Photo credit: National Open photo service<br />
Contents<br />
Editor’s Desk ..................................................... Ralph Dubisch<br />
Green Open II ....................................................... David Rupel<br />
More Green Open II ................................................. H. G. Pitre<br />
Grants Pass Open ................................................ Corey Russell<br />
Theoretically Speaking ........................................Bill McGeary<br />
Transitions ........................................................ Pete Prochaska<br />
The World Open ....................................................Michael Lee<br />
And In The End .................................................... Dana Muller<br />
I Never Met A Book ........................................ John Donaldson<br />
NW Grand Prix ................................................... Murlin Varner<br />
Seattle <strong>Chess</strong> Club Events<br />
Future Events<br />
Send renewals and changes of address to the business manager:<br />
Eric Holcomb<br />
NW <strong>Chess</strong> Business Manager<br />
1900 NE Third St, Ste 106-361<br />
Bend OR 97701-3889<br />
Eric@Holcomb.com<br />
<strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Knights<br />
Please donate today to help <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong>!<br />
Patrons, 2008-2009<br />
King ($1000+): Russell Miller<br />
Queen ($500-$999):<br />
Rook ($250-$499): Ralph Dubisch, Washington <strong>Chess</strong> Federation, Portland <strong>Chess</strong> Club<br />
Bishop ($100-$249): Michael Omori family, Oregon <strong>Chess</strong> Federation<br />
Knight ($50-$99): Robert Brewster, Steve Buck, Murlin Varner<br />
Pawn ($15-$49): Darby Monahan, Mark James<br />
Contributions may be sent to the <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Business Manager, and are greatly appreciated!
Rusty Miller makes the cover this month. Not only did he<br />
conceive and organize <strong>Chess</strong> Night at Portland’s PGE Park, he also<br />
designed a line of stylish fashion accessories to publicize the event.<br />
He is pictured wearing some of them at the National Open in Las<br />
Vegas. Unfortunately, the Vegas trip was financially draining, and<br />
Rusty isn’t heading to the U.S. Open this year.<br />
He’s still the top donor to <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> by far, though, and<br />
in addition to a special Stephen Christopher Memorial prize for the<br />
best Washington player rated under 2000 at the U.S. Open, he’s<br />
also arranged special Martha Jane Miller memorial prizes for women<br />
at some of the region’s big tournaments. There’s $100 available<br />
just for the ladies in the top section at the Oregon Open, and King<br />
Liao won this prize at the Washington Open.<br />
So thanks, Rusty, for your generous and innovative work to<br />
sponsor and promote chess in the <strong>Northwest</strong>!<br />
Here’s a complete list of prize winners from Spokane’s<br />
Washington Open:<br />
Open<br />
John Donaldson ............... 5.0, 1st Place ......................$ 1,000.00<br />
Joshua C Sinanan............. 4.5, 2nd-4th / 1st U2150........$ 425.00<br />
Nick J Raptis.................... 4.5, 2nd-4th / 1st U2150........$ 425.00<br />
Steven J Breckenridge ..... 4.5, 2nd-4th / 1st U2150........$ 425.00<br />
Howard Chen ................... 4.5, 2nd-4th / 1st U2150........$ 425.00<br />
Curt D Collyer ................. 4.0, 5th Place .........................$ 100.00<br />
Loal W Davis ................... 4.0, 5th Place .........................$ 100.00<br />
Michael Wang .................. 4.0, 2nd U2150 ...................... $ 250.00<br />
Dereque D Kelley ............ 3.5, 3rd-4th U2150 .................. $ 62.50<br />
David G Rupel ................. 3.5, 3rd-4th U2150 .................. $ 62.50<br />
Eduardo J Daroza ............ 3.5, 3rd-4th U2150 .................. $ 62.50<br />
David T Fulton ................ 3.5, 3rd-4th U2150 .................. $ 62.50<br />
......................................... Open section total ...............$ 3,400.00<br />
Premier<br />
Robert Herrera ................. 4.5, 1st-3rd Place ...................$ 316.67<br />
Ethan Gottlieb .................. 4.5, 1st-3rd Place ...................$ 316.67<br />
Daniel R Copeland .......... 4.5, 1st-3rd Place ...................$ 316.67<br />
Patrick Herbers ................ 4.0, 4th-5th Place................... $ 116.67<br />
Mark A Havrilla ............... 4.0, 4th-5th Place.................. $ 116.67<br />
David T Rowles ............... 4.0, 4th-5th Place................... $ 116.67<br />
Michael J Hosford ........... 4.0, 1st-3rd U1850 ................ $ 166.67<br />
Marvin Y Hayami ............ 4.0, 1st-3rd U1850 ................ $ 166.67<br />
James D Stripes ............... 4.0, 1st-3rd U1850 ................ $ 166.67<br />
Hillel Shirman ................. 3.5, 4th U1850 .........................$ 50.00<br />
James L McAleer ............. 3.5, 4th U1850 .........................$ 50.00<br />
......................................... Premier section total ...........$ 1,900.03<br />
Reserve<br />
Ryan S Ackerman ............ 5.5, 1st Place .........................$ 350.00<br />
Siva B Narayanan ............ 5.0, 2nd Place ........................$ 250.00<br />
Daniel J McCourt ............ 4.5, 3rd Place .........................$ 200.00<br />
Alan Walk ........................ 4.0, 4th-5th / 1st-4th U1550 ..$ 107.14<br />
Michael R Clark .............. 4.0, 4th-5th / 1st-4th U1550 ..$ 107.14<br />
Anatoly Grabar ................ 4.0, 4th-5th / 1st-4th U1550 ..$ 107.14<br />
Russell W Miller .............. 4.0, 4th-5th / 1st-4th U1550 ..$ 107.14<br />
Murlin E Varner ............... 4.0, 4th-5th / 1st-4th U1550 ..$ 107.14<br />
Taylor B Coles ................. 4.0, 4th-5th / 1st-4th U1550 ..$ 107.14<br />
Aaron M Nicoski ............. 4.0, 4th-5th / 1st-4th U1550 ..$ 107.14<br />
......................................... Reserve section total...........$ 1,549.98<br />
Editor’s Desk<br />
Ralph Dubisch<br />
Booster<br />
Shanglun Wang ................ 6.0, 1st Place .........................$ 300.00<br />
A George Stewart ............ 4.5, 2nd Place ........................$ 150.00<br />
James L Burney ............... 4.0, 3rd Place .........................$ 100.00<br />
Randy Fairfield ................ 4.0, 1st-2nd Unr..................... $ 100.00<br />
Michael J Zhao ................ 4.0, 1st-2nd Unr..................... $ 100.00<br />
James Waugh ................... 3.5, 4th-5th / 1st-2nd U1100 .$ 100.00<br />
Jacob V Mayer ................. 3.5, 4th-5th / 1st-2nd U1100 .$ 100.00<br />
Robert B Zhang ............... 3.5, 4th-5th / 1st-2nd U1100 .$ 100.00<br />
Henry Aguilar .................. 3.5, 4th-5th / 1st-2nd U1100 .$ 100.00<br />
......................................... Booster section total ...........$ 1,150.00<br />
......................................... Grand Total .........................$ 8,000.01<br />
Blitz-Open<br />
Steven J Breckenridge ..... 5.0, 1st Place ........................... $ 59.00<br />
Luke Harmon-Vellotti ...... 3.5, 2nd Place ......................... $ 29.00<br />
Duane J Polich ................. 2.5, 1st Place U1900................ $ 24.00<br />
......................................... Grand Total-Blitz ................... $ 112.00<br />
Special Prizes<br />
King Liao ......................... 1.0, Martha Jane Miller ......... $ 100.00<br />
Speaking of prize winners, Michael Lee didn’t win the U.S.<br />
Junior Closed in July, Ray Robson did with 6/7, but Michael scored<br />
50% and is now rated over 2400. We have his annotations from his<br />
last round draw with GM Vinay Bhat at the World Open (see page<br />
22), where Michael earned his first IM norm. Congratulations!<br />
Finally, Josh Sinanan’s student, Roland Feng, age 8 (and rated<br />
around 1700! He was the 2008 National K-1 Champion, and is<br />
2009 Washington State Grade 2 Co-Champion), supplies the<br />
following diagram as “The Adventures of Superking #1.”<br />
It’s Black to<br />
move.... but he has no<br />
mate!<br />
The solver’s first<br />
job is to find some<br />
chances for Black,<br />
then having spotted<br />
the sacrifices and<br />
checks, work out the<br />
white king’s march to<br />
safe haven.<br />
Good luck!
y<br />
David Rupel<br />
Green<br />
Open<br />
II<br />
Game in 90 minutes/2 hours with a 30<br />
second increment hopefully is the wave of<br />
the future in the USA. In Europe, it is the<br />
wave of the present.<br />
For the uninitiated, every time a player<br />
makes a move he adds an extra 30 seconds<br />
to his clock. Hence, one avoids the spectacle<br />
of frantic scrambles to make time control.<br />
This innovation, appearing in recent US<br />
championships, is attributed to no less a<br />
luminary than Fischer.<br />
It was a pleasure to play in the Second<br />
Green Open — and not just because I<br />
managed to achieve one of my rare, clear<br />
firsts.<br />
Organizer/Director Hanniegn Pitre<br />
deserves kudos for conducting a well-run,<br />
innovative event as well as promoting a<br />
“green” theme. Reduced entry fees were<br />
available to players who rode the bus,<br />
jogged, bicycled, etc. US Master Bill<br />
McGeary conducted a lecture for players<br />
rated under 1800.<br />
Perhaps having experience in tourneys<br />
in Spain and Costa Rica under similar time<br />
limits contributed to my success. I literally<br />
must go back decades in order to find my<br />
last full point versus former Washington<br />
state champion William Schill.<br />
Notes by David Rupel.<br />
David Rupel – William Schill<br />
Green Open II, Round 2<br />
Seattle, Washington, May 9, 2009<br />
1. Nf3 c5 2. c4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. e4 Bg7<br />
5. d4 cxd4 6. Nxd4<br />
By one of many alternate routes, we have<br />
a Sicilian Maroczy bind. Because Black<br />
often has problems creating tactical<br />
opportunities, it is a good choice when White<br />
faces a higher rated opponent.<br />
6. ...0-0 7. Be2 Nc6 8. Nc2 b6 9. 0-0<br />
Bb7 10. Be3 Rc8 11. f3 d6 12. Qd2 Re8<br />
13. Rac1 Ne5 14. b3 Ned7 15. Nb4 a6<br />
16. Nbd5 Nxd5 17. exd5 Nc5 18. Ne4<br />
18. ...e6 19. Bg5<br />
With the idea of forcing weaknesses on<br />
the light-squares.<br />
19. ...f6 20. Nxc5 dxc5 21. Bf4 exd5 22.<br />
cxd5<br />
22. ...f5 23. d6 Bd4+ 24. Kh1 b5 25. b4<br />
Qd7 26. bxc5 Bxc5<br />
27. Bd1 h5 28. Bb3+ Kh7 29. Rfe1 Bb6<br />
30. h3<br />
Better is 30. Rxc8 Bxc8 31. Bg5.<br />
30. …Rxc1 31. Rxc1 Bd8 32. Re1<br />
Rxe1+ 33. Qxe1 Bc8 34. Qe5 Qg7 35. Qe8<br />
Qh8<br />
36. Qc6??<br />
Trying to exploit my advantage on time,<br />
I played this too quickly. 36. d7! wins<br />
outright after 36. ...Bb7 37. Be5!<br />
Page 4 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009
After the text, black can save himself<br />
with 36. ...Qa1+ 37 Kh2 Qd4!<br />
More<br />
Green<br />
Open<br />
II<br />
Alas, he couldn’t find this resource in<br />
the time remaining on his clock and<br />
resigned.<br />
1-0<br />
“Now finally the exception. If both flags<br />
are fallen, and no one noticed which fell first,<br />
it is a draw. What is the likelihood that this<br />
will happen? Highly unlikely. But don’t<br />
bring it on. If your opponent’s flag has fallen,<br />
don’t torture him. Claim it.”<br />
Ethan was not recording his moves, and I<br />
gained one more bit of experience to use to<br />
point to that it is very important to ask the<br />
players to arrive early – at least 5 minutes<br />
before the stated round time – to go over<br />
the details of the clock setting, and highlight<br />
a few important rules, after which the<br />
tourney should go smoothly.<br />
The Green Open featured only four<br />
rounds of chess over two days, using Fischer<br />
time controls. I would recommend to the<br />
tournament directors of the <strong>Northwest</strong> that<br />
they consider these two aspects for their<br />
tourneys: shorter playing lengths for the<br />
rounds with a time control that is still long<br />
enough for a quality game, and fewer rounds<br />
in a weekend. Many players have digital<br />
clocks. It’s time to investigate the Fischer<br />
settings. We provided some instructions for<br />
setting both the Chronos and DGT XL<br />
clocks before round one began. We had<br />
virtually no problems, and I am sure the<br />
educational process will continue, so that a<br />
higher percentage of the players with digital<br />
clocks will be comfortable with both Fischer<br />
settings and demonstrating the correctness<br />
to their opponent. The hardest thing to cope<br />
with is that the players don’t want to come<br />
I write this now because we fortunately<br />
avoided any problems as occurred in the<br />
2009 US Championships, which recently<br />
experienced an indelicate<br />
recording moves issue in its<br />
by<br />
second round. We did have<br />
a problem in the game<br />
H. G. Pitre<br />
between Pat Hickey and<br />
Ethan Gottlieb. It was Pat’s<br />
first experience with the<br />
requirement to record every<br />
On May 9 & 10, 2009, the 2nd Green<br />
move throughout the game<br />
Open at the Seattle <strong>Chess</strong> Club got under<br />
regardless of the time<br />
way a little after the posted time of 10:15AM<br />
remaining, and he felt<br />
with some of these words to all the players:<br />
uncomfortable that his<br />
“We are following the USCF rules with young opponent was<br />
some specific ones highlighted and posted playing on in a “book draw”<br />
on the walls of the club, and with one rule position. I told Pat that he<br />
exception. It is extremely important that you had to play on. I did not<br />
record your moves, move after move, and notice that at one point his<br />
the same goes for your opponent. If he is opponent was not recording<br />
not doing so, you must alert me, the all his moves. Pat did not<br />
tournament director, to warn the opponent immediately make this<br />
to do this. After a couple of warnings a claim clearly to me. He later<br />
penalty may be assessed. When the told me that he was shocked<br />
opponent’s flag falls, if your opponent does that the opponent was not<br />
not acknowledge it and resign, then you doing so after the great<br />
must make the claim. So be alert to the status lengths I had gone to explain<br />
of your opponent’s clock. The Director at the start of the rounds that<br />
under USCF rules is not to be active in the players must do so. Well, we<br />
way he is under FIDE rules. You must act had an amicable outcome. It<br />
for yourself, by getting the TD (me) and was a book draw; Pat<br />
stating your claims.<br />
eventually alerted me that<br />
David Rupel. Photo credit: H. G. Pitre.<br />
August 2009 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Page 5
Paul Bartron. Photo credit: H. G. Pitre.<br />
Quentin Chi – Robert Goodfellow<br />
Green Open II, Round 3<br />
Seattle, Washington, May 10, 2009<br />
1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 d6 3. f4 Nf6 4. Bc4 g6 5.<br />
Nf3 Bg7 6. 0-0 0-0 7. d3 Nc6<br />
into the playing room for an orderly start to<br />
the round, but instead want to play skittles<br />
and blitz to the last minute or past the posted<br />
start time of each round, and thereby do not<br />
allow the efficient starting of each round.<br />
They do not see how it all comes together.<br />
Verifying that the clocks are set right at the<br />
start is completely under-appreciated.<br />
With this different tournament offering<br />
we were able to attract twenty-six players<br />
which is down from the thirty-two players<br />
who attended in the first Green Open to<br />
compete for a guaranteed prize fund. We also<br />
offered one lecture designed for the under-<br />
1800 rated players. The lecture was given<br />
by Master Bill McGeary. Bill had about eight<br />
young players in the audience and some<br />
parents, and a few other veterans. I heard<br />
laughter and other signs of fun, and I had to<br />
leave my desk a couple of times to look at<br />
the happenings. This feature of the tourney<br />
was much appreciated. Try offering this in<br />
your event.<br />
We offered incentives for players to<br />
carpool, take public transportation, walk, or<br />
bike to the site.<br />
The prize winners of the Open section:<br />
1st David Rupel, tied for 2nd & 3rd: Paul<br />
Bartron and Howard Chen, and tied for ist<br />
U-2000; Patrick Hickey, Peter O’Gorman,<br />
and Nathan Lee.<br />
For the Reserve section the winners<br />
were: Tied for 1st & 2nd: Quentin Chi and<br />
Justin Yu; 3rd Steve Buck, tied for 1st U-<br />
1600: Spencer Lehmann and Darby<br />
Monahan; tied for 1st U-1400: Jonathan Bell<br />
and Evangeline Chang.<br />
I asked a few players who won a prize<br />
to consider sending sending notes with their<br />
games to me or the editor. I don’t know how<br />
many will respond, but if they did so, they<br />
have been included here for your enjoyment.<br />
We also have a few games from the event<br />
that are available only at nwchess.com, and<br />
you can use the My<strong>Chess</strong>Viewer2.2 that can<br />
be found there to play through them. We may<br />
hold another event in the early Fall. I hope<br />
you’ll consider playing then.<br />
Pat Hickey and Brian Raffel helped me<br />
clean up the club at the end of the event.<br />
Thank you all.<br />
Notes to the following game are by<br />
Quentin Chi.<br />
We’ve reached the mainline position of<br />
the grand prix attack.<br />
8. h3<br />
8. Qe1 is more usual; White aims for a<br />
slower buildup.<br />
8. ...Bd7 9. a3 Qc8 10. Nh2 Nh5<br />
?? Black misreads the position. g2-g4<br />
does not weaken White, it weakens Black.<br />
11. g4 Nf6 12. f5<br />
12. ...e6 13. g5 Ne8 14. f6<br />
Entombing Black’s king bishop and<br />
strategically sealing the victory.<br />
14. ...Bh8 15. Ng4 h5 16. gxh6 a6 17.<br />
Qe1<br />
{White could consider the clearance<br />
play 17. h7+ first. – editor}<br />
17. ...Kh7 18. e5 d5 19. Be3<br />
Page 6 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009
21. Nexf6+ Nxf6 22. Nxf6+ Kh8 23.<br />
Bg5<br />
Enticing Black’s d5-d4 or d5xc4, thus<br />
allowing White’s knight passage to g5.<br />
19. ...d4<br />
19. ...b6 may be better, but leaves White<br />
with the initiative.<br />
19. ...Nxe5 looks like a good move, but<br />
there are many complications further down<br />
the line after 19. ...Nxe5 20. Nxe5 Bxf6<br />
(better than Nxf6 and if ...dxc4 or ...d4, Ne4)<br />
21. Nxd7 Qxd7 22. Bxc5, which leads to a<br />
very mixed position.<br />
It seemed like a chance I would take, and<br />
with so many pieces hanging, material was<br />
irrelevant and the main goal was the king.<br />
It was a very suspenseful position. I<br />
calculated for maybe 15 minutes, and finally<br />
deduced that the ending positions in most<br />
sequences were in my favor. At the time I<br />
thought that although ...Nxe5 was exciting<br />
and complicated, the best move was just<br />
...b6. Now I think he probably should have<br />
tried the ...Nxe5 variations.<br />
20. Ne4 Bxf6<br />
Desperation move, but there is nothing<br />
better.<br />
23. ...b5 24. Ba2 b4 25. Ne4 bxa3 26.<br />
bxa3<br />
{This recapture doesn’t seem necessary.<br />
26. Bf6+ and go for the king. – editor}<br />
26. ...Na7<br />
? 26. ...f5 would hold on longer.<br />
27. Bf6+ Kh7 28. Ng5+<br />
1-0<br />
Emanuel and Evangeline Chang with Mom. Photo credit: H. G. Pitre.<br />
August 2009 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Page 7
Grants<br />
Pass<br />
Open<br />
free to do other things; 2) White can play<br />
Be3 without worrying about ...Ng4; 3) When<br />
White’s bishop is at e3 and Black plays an<br />
eventual f5-f4, then White has natural escape<br />
square to f2.<br />
by<br />
Corey<br />
Russell<br />
Corey Russell – Peter Grant<br />
Grants Pass Open, Round 1<br />
Grants Pass, Oregon, March 14, 2009<br />
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bb5+ Bd7 4. Bxd7+<br />
Qxd7 5. 0-0 Nc6 6. c3 Nf6 7. Re1 g6 8. d4<br />
Rd8 9. d5<br />
13. ...Ne8 14. Be3 b6 15. a4 Nd6 16.<br />
Qe2<br />
I played to e2 instead of Qd3 to defend<br />
the c4 pawn so that my queen wouldn’t be<br />
“hanging” at d3 (remember many<br />
combinations are based on undefended<br />
pieces) and also so that if for some reason<br />
my e4 pawn or c4 pawn every had to take,<br />
wouldn’t have to worry about a pawn tempo<br />
to e4 or c4.<br />
16. ...a5<br />
This is a mistake; White wins a pawn.<br />
24. Rcb3 gxf3 25. Qxf3 Qd6 26. Qxh5<br />
Rfc8 27. Qg4 Rf8??<br />
This loses on the spot. 27. ... Kf7 would<br />
offer more resistance. However White’s<br />
followup of 28. Qe6+! Qxe6 29. dxe6+<br />
Kxe6 30 Rxb6+ leads to a superior endgame<br />
for White.<br />
9. ...Ne5?!<br />
Dubious. This weakens Black’s pawn<br />
structure for what appears to be little gain.<br />
Instead ...Nb8 is perfectly acceptable since<br />
White closed the center with d5. From b8<br />
can go to a6 and c7, supporting a future b5<br />
advance.<br />
10. Nxe5 dxe5 11. c4<br />
Played both to reinforce strongpoint d5<br />
and to open up c3 for White’s knight.<br />
11. ...Bg7 12. Nc3 0-0 13. f3<br />
A multi-purpose move: 1) Defends e4<br />
with a pawn, so the pieces defending it are<br />
While this does stop White’s idea of a5,<br />
it creates a backward pawn at b6 which is a<br />
long term weakness. Perhaps instead he<br />
should have tried to get his own plans going<br />
with 16. ...f5.<br />
17. Ra3 f5 18. Rb3 f4 19. Bf2 Rb8 20.<br />
Rc1 g5 21. Nb5 Nxb5 22. Rxb5 h5 23. Rc3<br />
g4?<br />
28. Bxc5!!<br />
This move is based on an intermezzo (in<br />
between move).<br />
28. ...bxc5 29. Rxb8 Qxb8<br />
If 29. ... Rxb8 30. Qe6+ Qxe6 31. Rxb8+<br />
(the in-between move), and Black has no<br />
way to block well with the queen, so end<br />
result White up an exchange and easily<br />
winning since the a-pawn will fall. Or in the<br />
same line 30. ...Kf8 31. Qxd6 Rxb3 32. Qxc5<br />
Rxb2 33. Qxa5, when White’s queen and<br />
passed pawns will be too much for Black.<br />
30. Qe6+<br />
Of course 30. ...Rf7 will lose a queen<br />
for nothing to Rxb8, and 30. ...Kh8 31. Rh3+<br />
leads to mate. Therefore Black resigned.<br />
1-0<br />
Page 8 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009
Christian Shield – Corey Russell<br />
Grants Pass Open, Round 2<br />
Grants Pass, Oregon, March 14, 2009<br />
1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 d6 3. g3 Nc6 4. Bg2 g6<br />
5. d3 Bg7 6. Be3 Rb8 7. Qd2 b5<br />
White and Black are playing a “secret”<br />
game here – Black doesn't White to trade<br />
off his dark-sqared bishop just yet, so makes<br />
other moves to improve his position in the<br />
mean time.<br />
8. Nge2 Nd4<br />
Normally one doesn't move a piece twice<br />
in the opening, except for king safety or to<br />
procure a large amount of material.<br />
However since the position is not open at<br />
the moment, Black can get away with this.<br />
If Black allows White to play d4 right now,<br />
White would get a good game, so the text<br />
prevents this.<br />
9. h3 e6 10. 0-0 Bd7 11. Nd1 b4<br />
All right. Black is still not castled, so<br />
what gives? Answer is that with position<br />
closed he can get away with this. Black<br />
knows pawn to c3 is coming, so he wants to<br />
force opening of the b-line if that does.<br />
12. c3 bxc3 13. Ndxc3?<br />
While improving one's knight seems like<br />
a natural idea, it was more important to<br />
contest d4 with 13. bxc3. Now Black has<br />
opportunity to make the d4-hole a liability.<br />
13. ...Nxe2+!<br />
White would love to contest d4 with<br />
Nxe2, but problem is would lose a pawn to<br />
14. ... Rxb2. Note that with the queen<br />
diverted, this seems like a good time to finish<br />
kingside development.<br />
14. Qxe2 Ne7 15. Qd2 Nc6<br />
Delaying castling yet again but for a<br />
good reason. If 15. ...0-0 then 16. d4 is okay<br />
for White.<br />
16. Bh6<br />
16. ...0-0<br />
Black is not worried about the bishop<br />
trade now since his other pieces can assert<br />
control over d4. Black could win a pawn<br />
with 16. ...Bxh6 17. Qxh6 Rxb2, but cost is<br />
can't castle. Price was too high for me.<br />
17. Bxg7 Kxg7 18. Ne2 Qf6 19. Rab1<br />
Rb6 20. Qc3 Qxc3<br />
21. bxc3?<br />
Now Black will both control the b-file<br />
and infiltrate the seventh rank by force.<br />
Instead 21. Nxc3 Rfb8 22. b3 Rb4 23. Ne2<br />
Nd4 would leave Black with a small<br />
advantage but that is better than the text<br />
which gives Black a large advantage.<br />
21. ...Rfb8 22. Rxb6 Rxb6 23. Ra1 Rb2<br />
24. Bf1<br />
This weakens f3 square, but the natural<br />
move 24. Nf4 fails to 24. ... g5 25. Nh5+<br />
Kg6 26. g4 Ne5 27. Bf1 f5 wins the g4 pawn,<br />
since it can't move else the white knight falls.<br />
24. ...Ne5 25. d4 Nf3+ 26. Kg2 Nd2<br />
27. a4<br />
This parries 27. ... Nxf1 followed by<br />
...Bb5, but doesn't address the other threat.<br />
27. ...Nxe4 28. dxc5 dxc5 29. f3? Nxc3<br />
Being two pawns down in an endgame<br />
and with the opponent having the more<br />
active pieces to boot, White decides it's safe<br />
to resign here.<br />
0-1<br />
August 2009 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Page 9
Corey Russell – Peter Vancouvering<br />
Grants Pass Open, Round 3<br />
Grants Pass, Oregon, March 14, 2009<br />
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4<br />
Nc6 5. Nc3 Qc7 6. Be3 a6 7. Bd3<br />
It should be noted that 7. ... Bc5? 8.<br />
Nxe6! wins a pawn for White, since the<br />
move double hits Q on c7 and bishop on c5.<br />
7. ...Nf6 8. Nb3?!<br />
11. ...d5 12. Ng3 Rd8 13. Bg5 Be7 14.<br />
Bxf6 Bxf6 15. exd5 Rxd5<br />
Ewald Hopfencitz – Corey Russell<br />
Grants Pass Open, Round 4<br />
Grants Pass, Oregon, March 15, 2009<br />
1. e4 c5 2. c4 Nc6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 e6<br />
After the game, my opponent said that<br />
he doesn’t encounter this move from<br />
anyone. Most people he has played<br />
apparently play 4. .... e5!?. While that move<br />
might be enough to maintain the balance,<br />
seems little anti-positional. My move is<br />
better attempt at creating an imbalance (and<br />
therefore winning potential).<br />
5. d3 d5 6. e5<br />
This didn’t work out very well. Was<br />
worried about 8. ...Nxd4 9. Bxd4 Bc5 10.<br />
Bxc5 Qxc5 and I thought it would be hard<br />
to win as White. However, instead of 8. Nb3<br />
I could have tried 8. h3 Nxd4 9. Bxd4 Bc5<br />
10. Bxc5 Qxc5 11. Qe2 (threatening e5 and<br />
Ne4-d6) d6 12. f4 and White doesn’t have<br />
to draw just yet.<br />
8. ...Bb4 9. 0-0 0-0 10. h3 d6 11. Ne2<br />
16. Qc1!<br />
Defends the b-pawn, gets out of the pin<br />
on the d-file, prevents Black queen from<br />
getting in on f4, and allows White to get at<br />
least one good piece with Be4.<br />
16. ...g6 17. Be4 Rd8 18. c3 b6 19. Qe3<br />
Bb7 20. Rad1 Bg7 21. Bf3 Rac8<br />
Black offered a draw here. While it’s true<br />
he has the bishop pair, his dark-squared<br />
bishop is blunted at the moment. White’s<br />
pieces are holding the equilibirium. My<br />
opponent thought this was a kind of position<br />
where whoever over-extended themselves<br />
in an attempt to win would lose instead. I<br />
agree with that assessment, since the only<br />
way I could see to win was in fact if he did<br />
just that. So agreed to his draw. As it turns<br />
out, we both won the rest of our games and<br />
ended up tying for 1st with 4.5 points out of<br />
5. He also won the class A section.<br />
6. ...d4! 7. exf6 dxc3 8. bxc3 Qxf6 9.<br />
Bb2?<br />
Too passive of a posting for the bishop.<br />
It never moves for the rest of the game.<br />
Think White probably had to play 9. d4,<br />
though Black should still be okay.<br />
9. ...Bd6 10. g3 0-0 11. Bg2 e5 12. 0-0<br />
Bg4 13. h3 Bh5 14. g4 Bg6<br />
Sure this avoids the pawn doubling, but<br />
makes a ...d5 break by Black unnecessarily<br />
powerful. I think 11. Bd2 with the idea of<br />
a3 is better since if Black tried to break d5<br />
in that line, White will be able to force Black<br />
to have the isolated d-pawn if he does it right<br />
away.<br />
½–½<br />
15. d4??<br />
Gives Black a huge attack. Much more<br />
promising plan for White would be 15. Qe2,<br />
Nd2-e4.<br />
Page 10 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009
15. ...e4 16. Nd2 Qf4 17. Re1 Qh2+ 18.<br />
Kf1 f5 19. g5<br />
I didn’t expect this move. Instinctively<br />
though I knew this was a critical position<br />
— I felt like there was a forced win here,<br />
just had to find it. Eventually noticed that if<br />
I could just get rid of the d2 knight, f4-f3<br />
would be devastating. Once I realized that,<br />
plan became clear.<br />
12. Bxc5 dxc5 13. Nc4 Ne8 14. d6 Qd8<br />
15. Qd2<br />
So that I could respond Rfd1 to a ...Be6<br />
by Black (to maintain my d-pawn).<br />
19. ...cxd4 20. cxd4 Bb4 21. Re3 Bxd2<br />
22. Qxd2 f4 23. Rxe4 Bxe4 24. Bxe4 f3 25.<br />
Bxf3 Rxf3<br />
26. ...Raf8 will be devastating — White<br />
saw no defence to that, so resigned now.<br />
0-1<br />
Corey Russell – Ken Frojen<br />
Grants Pass Open, Round 5<br />
Grants Pass, Oregon, March 15, 2009<br />
This next game was very satisfying for<br />
me. I’ve taken a lot of losses to the modern<br />
in my career, so was nice to give back some<br />
of the same!<br />
1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Nf3 Bg7<br />
5. h3 0-0 6. Be3 c6 7. Be2 Qc7 8. 0-0 Nbd7<br />
9. d5 a6 10. a4 Nc5 11. Nd2 e5<br />
15. ...f5 16. a5 Bd7 17. Nb6 Rb8 18.<br />
Bc4+ Kh8 19. Rad1 Rf6 20. exf5 Rxd6<br />
21. Qxd6!<br />
Not much of a “sacrifice,” since I will<br />
be getting R+N+B for the queen, BUT my<br />
pieces aren’t on the kingside, so still requires<br />
accurate play.<br />
21. ...Nxd6 22. Rxd6 Qh4<br />
23. Nxd7!<br />
Much better than Rxd7. My pieces must<br />
get into the center as soon as possible, both<br />
for defense and attack. The queen side clamp<br />
not important now that I have a material<br />
advantage.<br />
23. ...Rd8 24. Be6 e4 25. g3!<br />
This move enables White’s last piece to<br />
get into the center with tempo, with<br />
devastating effect.<br />
25. ...Qh5 26. Nxe4 gxf5<br />
27. Ndf6 Bxf6 28. Nxf6 Qe2 29. Rxd8+<br />
Kg7 30. Ne8+ Kg6 31. Rd6 Kg5 32. f4+<br />
Kh5 33. Bf7#<br />
1-0<br />
Needed: at least 20 adult Washingtonians<br />
to play in the Oregon Open.<br />
Why? The Oregon <strong>Chess</strong> Federation and the Portland <strong>Chess</strong> Club<br />
have offered to donate $200 to <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> if twenty or more<br />
adults from Washington enter the Oregon Open this year.<br />
Washington players: Support NWC. Play in the Oregon Open 2009!<br />
August 2009 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Page 11
Bogo Indian:<br />
1. d4 Nf6<br />
2. c4 e6<br />
3. Nf3 Bb4+<br />
4. Nbd2 c5,<br />
Part 1<br />
Players who have placed their faith in<br />
the Nimzo Indian have always known the<br />
ugly necessity of contending with 3. Nf3.<br />
For many this wasn’t a matter of fear as of<br />
annoyance. Black’s original choices were to<br />
revert to the Queens Gambit with d5, play<br />
the rather dull Queens Indian or go with Bb4<br />
entering the Bogo. Time marched on and<br />
with it some further discoveries came along<br />
like playing 3. ...c5, 3. ...Nc6, 3. ...a6 or even<br />
3. ...Ne4! Any of these provides practical<br />
chances, but many Nimzo players are left<br />
with only the original options. The Bogo<br />
Indian with 3. ...Bb4+ has remained near the<br />
center of consideration because of flexibility<br />
and resilience. At least, that is what drew<br />
me to it.<br />
After 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Bb4+,<br />
White chooses 4. Nbd2 as the most dynamic<br />
retort. White has two pawns in the center<br />
on the fourth rank and the black Bb4 seems<br />
to be ever so slightly vulnerable. The<br />
possibility of having the center and the two<br />
bishops makes Nbd2 a natural choice. Of<br />
course, Black’s thoughts are quite different.<br />
With no initial commitments beyond the<br />
Bb4, Black has almost a catalog of choices<br />
from which to select. One of the choices that<br />
I am interested in is based on Black’s tiny<br />
lead in development. With 4. ...c5, Black<br />
reaffirms intentions in the center as well as<br />
offering the Bb4 a bit of support. This is the<br />
starting point.<br />
Theoretically Speaking<br />
by Bill McGeary<br />
different general approaches after<br />
exchanging Bb4 for Nd2: keep to the<br />
standard of arranging a dark square pawn<br />
phalanx with d6/e5 or b6/d6 and maybe a<br />
later e5, or Black can look to exchange<br />
c5xd4 drawing a White piece into the center<br />
and then gaining time by harrassing that<br />
piece. Obviously, this latter approach has a<br />
much more tactical character which makes<br />
it a refreshing change for some players.<br />
Eric Prie – Viktor Korchnoi<br />
First Meudon Open<br />
Meudon, France, 1984<br />
1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. d4 Bb4+ 4. Nbd2<br />
c5 5. a3 Bxd2+ 6. Qxd2 cxd4 7. Qxd4 Nc6<br />
8. Qh4<br />
This move doesn’t take into<br />
consideration Black’s ideas. On h4 the white<br />
queen is looking to instigate some kind of<br />
trouble for the black king, but with only<br />
minimal support from the rest of the army<br />
this seems too optimistic. In fact, White’s<br />
king is the more vulnerable and that becomes<br />
evident in short order. Most likely the best<br />
move for White is 8. Qc3.)<br />
White isn’t<br />
completely lost<br />
yet, but it’s close.<br />
The disparity on<br />
the board is the<br />
activity and<br />
coordination of each army. White’s men tend<br />
to threats and work individually to keep from<br />
further disaster. Black’s pieces cooperate to<br />
find further gains. Optically it appears that<br />
neither side really has much of a space<br />
advantage, but considering the positions of<br />
the white king and black queen it feels as if<br />
White is severely cramped. That is a<br />
consequence of the piece activity and<br />
coordination.<br />
14. Nd2 Nxe2 15. Kxe2 d5 16. cxd5<br />
exd5 17. Re1 b6 18. f4 Re8 19. Kf1 Qd3+<br />
20. Kf2 Ba6 21. Nf3<br />
Regular choices at move five for White<br />
are 5. e3 or 5. a3. With 5. dxc5 White<br />
8. ...0-0 9. Bg5 Qa5+ 10. Bd2 Qf5 11.<br />
exchanges a center pawn for almost no<br />
e3 Qc2<br />
reason, which is enough for Black to smile Here is a case of creative accounting.<br />
and consider it a minor victory. Pushing 5. White used two moves to get the Bc1 to d2<br />
e3 White is happy to tend to business and while Black used 3 moves to get Qd8 to c2,<br />
see what ideas Black has, expecting to come yet which has better prospects? Again, it is<br />
to a more definite course of action a bit later the relative security of the king that makes<br />
on. That leaves the move that most directly one more effective than the other, king safety<br />
questions Black about the choice of 4. ...c5, that follows from Black developing pieces<br />
namely 5. a3. Black will be compelled to in the first moves of the game while White<br />
part with the black square Bishop and then attended to long range concepts.<br />
21. ...d4 22. Bd2 dxe3+ 23. Bxe3 Qc2+<br />
24. Kg1 Qxb2 25. Qf2 Qf6<br />
tend to weaknesses like d6. Black has two 12. Bc1 Ne4 13. Be2 Nc3!<br />
Page 12 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009
Prie has done an admirable job of not<br />
falling completely off the board, achieving<br />
a compete mobilization at the cost of a pawn.<br />
Korchnoi rejects a queen exchange because<br />
of the bishops of opposite color. There are<br />
two well-known consequences of bishops<br />
of opposite color: they work in the favor of<br />
a side which is attacking and they offer<br />
increased drawing chances in endgames.<br />
Both of those reasons factor into Korchnoi’s<br />
decision.<br />
26. Rad1 h6 27. Bc1 Rad8 28. Rxd8<br />
Rxd8 29. h3 Bb7 30. Kh2 Na5 31. Ne5 Nb3<br />
32. Be3 Qd6<br />
33. Qc2 Qd5 34. Qb2 Nd2 35. Re2<br />
Nf1+<br />
0-1<br />
Korchnoi’s play is worth remembering.<br />
White’s decision at move eight to position<br />
the queen on h4 is a place to look for<br />
improvements. The candidates are f4, c3 and<br />
four squares on the d-file.<br />
Sitting on f4 the queen seem to be<br />
actively eyeing e5 and d6, yet is still in the<br />
way of Black’s advance: 8. Qf4 e5 9. Qg3<br />
(not 9. Nxe5 Qa5+) 9. ...e4 10. Nd2 0-0 11.<br />
e3 d5 12. Be2 d4 with advantage in Quinn –<br />
Miezis, Cork 2005.<br />
Of the squares on the d-file, d3 offers<br />
Black prospects based on getting Ba6 in and<br />
spotting the c4 pawn, while d2 always has<br />
to be prepared for ...Ne4.<br />
8. Qd1 has worked out okay, though<br />
looking entirely retrograde. Offering no<br />
more time to Black, White can arrange the<br />
development of the king’s bishop combined<br />
with b4/Bb2. This highlights the positive<br />
aspects of the trade on move five for White.<br />
Eingorn – Osnos, Leningrad 1987, followed<br />
8. Qd1 d5 9. e3 0-0 10. b4 Qe7 11. Bb2 dxc4<br />
12. Bxc4 e5 13. b5 Na5 14. Ba2 e4 15. Nd4<br />
a6 16. Bc3 with a large advantage, as Black’s<br />
Na5 is a problem as well as detracting from<br />
offensive operations.<br />
Black improved in Jankovic – Kurajica,<br />
Jahorina 2003, with 8. Qd1 d5 9. e3 0-0 10.<br />
b4 dxc4 11. Qxd8 Rxd8 12. Bxc4 a6 13.<br />
Bb2 b5 14. Be2 Bb7 15. 0-0 Nd5.<br />
White is slightly better with the two<br />
bishops, but Black is very centralized and<br />
actually was able to outplay his opponent in<br />
this game.<br />
8. Qd6 is the move White would like to<br />
make work, but after 8. ...Ne4 9.Qd3 d5, the<br />
question is which side has used more<br />
energy? It seems to me that Black will do<br />
okay by changing direction from 9. ...d5 10.<br />
e3 0-0 11. b4, which was played by M.<br />
Gurevich, and investigating 9. ...f5 10. e3<br />
a5 arranging with b6 and Bb7/a6.<br />
White will likely be a bit better, but<br />
Black definitely has chances similar to lines<br />
in the Nimzo.<br />
August 2009 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Page 13
That leaves 8. Qc3 which was the move<br />
I originally saw in Gheorgiu – Christiansen,<br />
Cleveland 1975, though in the move order<br />
7. ...0-0 8. e3 Nc6 9. Qc3. Recently the<br />
position after 8. Qc3 has been seen in the<br />
games of GM Miezis, with 8. Qc3 d5 9. e3<br />
0-0 10. b4 Re8 11. Bb2 Bd7 12. Rd1 Rc8<br />
13. Qb3 Qe7 14. h3?! Vitiugov – Miezis,<br />
Keres Memorial 2006, which ended in<br />
Black’s favor following White’s lack of<br />
regard for centralized forces.<br />
Nb6 14. Bb5 e5 15. Nd2 Bd7 16. 0-0 a6 17.<br />
Nc4 Nc8 with equality; later Black won.<br />
Or 8. Qc3 d5 9. cxd5 exd5 10. Bg5 d4<br />
11. Qc5 h6 12. Bxf6 Qxf6 13. Rd1 b6 14.<br />
Qc4 0-0 15. Nxd4 Ne5 16. Qc2 Bg4 17. f3<br />
Rac8 18. Qb3 Rfd8, Guidarelli – Miezis,<br />
France 2007.<br />
Gheorgiu accepted the pawn and was<br />
able to resist Christiansen’s initiative. This<br />
suggests that White’s play in the Vitiugov –<br />
Miezis game was worth following, but after<br />
move 13 White should be a bit more prudent.<br />
Back at move seven White had an<br />
alternative that was given the thumbs up by<br />
theory: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Bb4+ 4.<br />
Nbd2 c5 5. a3 Bxd2+ 6. Qxd2 cxd4 7. b4<br />
with the idea of Bb2 and capturing back on<br />
d4 with the advance b4 already in.<br />
A further direction for improvement for<br />
Black 10. ...Nbd7 11. Rc1 Qxd4 12. Nxd4<br />
Nb6 13. e3 Bd7 14. Be2 a5 15. b5 Ne4 16.<br />
0-0 Rac8, when the active Black pieces<br />
negated the two bishops sufficiently in Sorin<br />
– Kosic, Mallorca (Ol) 2004.<br />
The piece sac looks very strong after 19.<br />
fxg4 Nxg4 20. Nf3 Rxd1+ 21. Qxd1 Qxb2.<br />
So, returning to Gheorgiu – Christiansen,<br />
the play was similar: 7. ...0-0 8. e3 Nc6 9.<br />
Qc3 d5 10. b4 e5!?<br />
Kozul – Christiansen, Novi Sad (Ol)<br />
1990, saw 7. ...0-0 8. Bb2 d5 9. cxd5 Qxd5<br />
10. Qxd4 Qxd4 11. Nxd4 Bd7 12. e3 Rc8<br />
with a small plus for White due to the two<br />
bishops.<br />
An alternative approach for Black is 7.<br />
...0-0 8. Bb2 d6 9. Qxd4 e5 10. Qh4 a5 11.<br />
b5 Nbd7 12. Rd1 Qe7, Del Rey – Playa, San<br />
Rafael 1992.<br />
Improving for Black in Huss –<br />
Landengergue, Lucern 1994, Black played<br />
10. ...Nc6 11. Qxd5 Nxd5 12. Rc1 f6 13. e4<br />
Black has c5 and b6 to initiate queenside<br />
operations to go with the backward d6.<br />
All in all, the sequence with 7. b4 is<br />
interesting, but not as fearsome as some<br />
think.<br />
Page 14 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009
August 2009 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Page 15
The Ever-<br />
Changing Map<br />
Student: Pete, can we talk about<br />
planning some more?<br />
Master: Sure, what’s on your mind.<br />
Student: Well, we’ve talked about a<br />
master figuring out what he wants to do<br />
before he worries about how to do it. And<br />
you’ve shown me a couple of games that<br />
illustrate where the “what?” comes from. In<br />
Wells-Totsky, we saw strategy following<br />
structure: Grandmaster Wells exchanged<br />
pieces in such a way that his remaining<br />
pieces coordinated smoothly with the pawn<br />
structure, while leaving his opponent’s<br />
pieces badly hampered by that same<br />
structure. Then in Lehmann-Mueller we saw<br />
structure following strategy: Black’s<br />
development was delayed, and his king was<br />
in the center, and so Hans Lehmann blasted<br />
open the center to create attacking lines. In<br />
other words, he created the structure he<br />
needed for his strategy to work.<br />
Master: That’s a good summary. Go on.<br />
Student: Well, I’ve been trying to do that<br />
in my own games. I figure out what I want<br />
to do, and then work out a way to make that<br />
happen. But then...my opponent gets in the<br />
way.<br />
Master: (chuckling) They do have a way<br />
of doing that, don’t they? The two games<br />
you mentioned are great illustrations of the<br />
basic theme, but neither is typical of the way<br />
master games normally develop.<br />
Student: They’re not?<br />
Master: No, because in each of them,<br />
one single strategic theme ran through the<br />
entire game—or at least the part of the game<br />
with which we were concerned. I started<br />
with those games so that you’d have a clear<br />
idea of the planning process. However, as<br />
you aptly point out, one’s opponent has this<br />
nasty habit of not playing along. That can<br />
happen in either of two ways: he blocks your<br />
progress, or he does something that actually<br />
changes the map.<br />
Student: Oh that’s an interesting way<br />
to think about it.<br />
Master: The image isn’t mine, though<br />
it sure makes sense to me. Garry Kasparov<br />
once observed that planning in chess is like<br />
getting directions off a map that keeps<br />
changing! That’s why most planning is<br />
Transitions<br />
by Pete Prochaska<br />
short-term: the map changes too quickly—<br />
and too significantly—for long term plans<br />
to reach fruition, except in very broad terms.<br />
Student: What do you mean?<br />
Master: Well, as an analogy, think about<br />
the situation in Europe in early 1944. What<br />
was the Allied strategy for winning World<br />
War II?<br />
Student: To invade Europe. Oh, I see<br />
what you mean: it didn’t take any great<br />
strategic acumen to see that. There really<br />
wasn’t anything else they could do. The<br />
strategic issues that Ike’s staff had to deal<br />
with were the operational possibilities for<br />
implementing that general strategy.<br />
Master: Exactly. The corollary in chess<br />
is this: there are only two basic winning<br />
strategies: to mate your opponent’s king with<br />
a direct attack—what we call “Kill The<br />
King,” or win some material, promote a<br />
pawn, and then mate your opponent’s king—<br />
what we call “Win In The End.” The<br />
difficulty, of course, is that our opponent is<br />
not only working to stop us, he’s also<br />
actively attempting to do the same thing to<br />
us. So what we end up with is a constantly<br />
shifting battlefield—which, in turn, points<br />
to the absolute necessity of adapting our<br />
plans as the map of that battlefield changes.<br />
Student: That makes sense, but I do have<br />
a question.<br />
Master: Surprise, surprise…<br />
Student: (smiling) In another recent<br />
conversation, you shared a story about<br />
Capablanca. As I remember it, several<br />
players were analyzing a complex endgame,<br />
and not finding a convincing way for White<br />
to realize his apparently significant<br />
advantage. Then Capa wandered by, and<br />
since he was generally regarded as the<br />
greatest endgame player in the world, they<br />
asked him. He looked at the position for a<br />
few moments, and then pushed all the pieces<br />
off the board. Capablanca then proceeded<br />
to set up a position and told the players that<br />
was what White needed to achieve. Once<br />
they saw the target position, they understood<br />
how to win the game. Then it was just a<br />
matter of reaching that position, which they<br />
were able to do without too much trouble.<br />
That seems like a great example of longterm<br />
planning.<br />
How does that<br />
fit with your<br />
ever-changing<br />
map?<br />
Master:<br />
It’s a great<br />
story, and an<br />
excellent question. There are several things<br />
to keep in mind. To start with, we don’t know<br />
how far removed Capa’s “target position”<br />
was from the actual position about which<br />
he was asked. If it was only a matter of a<br />
half-dozen moves, that’s a quite reasonable<br />
planning horizon. If it was more than that, it<br />
still would have been something to aim for,<br />
though the probability that target position<br />
would need to be revised increases<br />
exponentially.<br />
It’s also true that endgame thinking is<br />
often more schematic—based around<br />
achieving key positions—than middlegame<br />
thinking can afford to be. That’s because<br />
endgame positions are often more stable than<br />
most middlegame positions. Finally, we also<br />
know that White was attempting to convert<br />
an advantage, so Black’s ability to<br />
significantly change the position and<br />
direction of play—to alter the map, as it<br />
were—might have been quite limited.<br />
Student: So a player might have a broad<br />
strategy—attack the king in the center, for<br />
example—but the operational plans are<br />
normally relatively short-term.<br />
Master: Indeed. That’s the only way to<br />
allow for the fact that we’re getting<br />
directions from a battlemap that’s in constant<br />
flux. It seems to me the basic planning<br />
question is “Where do I want my pieces over<br />
the next 5-6 moves.”<br />
However, that’s enough general theory<br />
for now. Let’s look at a practical example,<br />
involving two of the strongest players in<br />
chess history, Mikhail Botvinnik and Paul<br />
Keres, played during the 1952 USSR<br />
Championship in Moscow. The reigning<br />
World Champion, Botvinnik, has White. Not<br />
surprisingly, he heads for an Exchange<br />
Queen’s Gambit, one of his favorite<br />
variations: 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4.<br />
cxd5 exd5 5. Bg5 Be7 6. e3 0–0 7. Bd3<br />
Nbd7 8. Qc2 Re8 9. Nge2 Nf8.<br />
Page 16 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009
So far, so normal. Now, however,<br />
Botvinnik plays 10. 0–0, which may well<br />
have been a novelty at the time.<br />
Student: Novelty? That seems about as<br />
normal as normal can be.<br />
Master: It certainly does now, but as<br />
Botvinnik points out in his superb notes to<br />
the game, there were two “normal” plans,<br />
at that time. White chose 9. Nf3, castled<br />
kingside, and attacked on the queenside, or<br />
he chose 9. Nge2, castled queenside, and<br />
attacked on the kingside.<br />
This is the first time, at least so far as I<br />
know, that White combined 9. Nge2 and 10.<br />
0-0. This is the first change in the standard<br />
map, and both players have to start adapting.<br />
Botvinnik would have worked out various<br />
possibilities beforehand, though it’s not clear<br />
from his notes, or Kasparov’s later<br />
commentary, whether Botvinnik anticipated<br />
the way Keres responds.<br />
He starts by protecting his d-pawn with<br />
10. ...c6, after which Botvinnik prepares the<br />
typical minority attack with 11. Rab1.<br />
However, Keres now played 11. ...Bd6,<br />
which is rather unusual for this type of<br />
position. What’s he up to?<br />
Student: Well, how does this position<br />
differ from the more usual one with the<br />
White knight on f3? The e2-knight doesn’t<br />
protect h2, and so the White kingside is more<br />
vulnerable. Ah, there it is: if Botvinnik<br />
continues routinely with 12. b4?, Keres wins<br />
a pawn with 12. …Bxh2+ 13. Kxh2 Ng4+<br />
and 14. …Qxg5.<br />
Master: Is the threat real?<br />
Student: It sure seems like it. Black<br />
would be a pawn up, have weakened White’s<br />
kingside and increased his material<br />
superiority on the kingside. I can’t see why<br />
Botvinnik would want that. And before you<br />
ask: no, White doesn’t have an equal or<br />
stronger threat of his own.<br />
Master: Okay, so White needs to defend.<br />
How would you do that?<br />
Student: Well, 12. Ng3 occurs to me,<br />
but I don’t really want the knight tied down<br />
like that. Perhaps it’s just best to play 12.<br />
Kh1.<br />
Master: And if Black plays 12. ...Bxh2<br />
anyway?<br />
Student: That’s the point. It isn’t check,<br />
so White can play 13. Bxf6 and after 13.<br />
...Qxf6 simply capture the bishop on h2.<br />
Master: Good job! Botvinnik did, in<br />
fact, play 12. Kh1, and Keres replied 12.<br />
...Ng6.<br />
How would you proceed now?<br />
Student: Hmm…how has the position<br />
changed? Black has another piece on the<br />
kingside, and the b1-h7 diagonal is<br />
blocked…oh, and the white bishop can’t<br />
retreat after 13. …h6, which means White<br />
would have to exchange on f6. That brings<br />
another piece—the black queen—to the<br />
kingside. So the obvious 13. b4 looks wrong;<br />
Black will be much better placed than usual<br />
to attack the white king.<br />
Master: That’s accurate and astute<br />
analysis. If White doesn’t play on the<br />
queenside, what else might he do?<br />
Student: I probably have something of<br />
an advantage—I know that these days White<br />
often attacks in the center rather than on the<br />
queenside, so 13. f3 pops to mind. However,<br />
even without that “hint”—it’s sort of like<br />
your 1944 Europe analogy. What else is<br />
White going to do? The kingside doesn’t<br />
look all that promising, at least not yet, and<br />
we’ve ruled out queenside play—at least not<br />
without additional preparation. When Keres<br />
played 11. ...Bd6, is it possible he hadn’t<br />
considered the possibility of White attacking<br />
in the center?<br />
Master: It actually seem quite probable.<br />
He was one of the best players in history,<br />
and had he fully considered the implications<br />
of a White central advance, he almost<br />
certainly would not have played 11.<br />
...Bd6. He saw one change in the map—10.<br />
0-0—and played to exploit it.<br />
However, Botvinnik now takes<br />
advantage of that additional change in the<br />
map and played 13. f3. This is a truly<br />
significant moment in the history of a truly<br />
significant variation. You’ll sometimes read<br />
that, in the position, Botvinnik “invented” a<br />
new way to play the Queen’s Gambit<br />
Exchange Variation. That’s not really true,<br />
of course. He was a great player, a great<br />
openings theoretician, and probably the<br />
world’s leading expert of the Queen’s<br />
Gambit. He knew that a central advance is a<br />
basic strategy in many openings, including<br />
this one. The real point is that he realized<br />
the map has changed enough to allow him<br />
to execute that fundamental strategy here.<br />
As you point out, this approach went on<br />
to become the mainline of the Exchange<br />
Variation, and was championed by<br />
Botvinnik’s famous protégé—one Garry<br />
Kasparov.<br />
Student: But Kasparov didn’t normally<br />
play 11. Rab1, did he?<br />
Master: No, there’s no point in that.<br />
Garry’s approach, and the modern main line,<br />
is 11. f3. But the concept starts right here in<br />
Botvinnik-Keres. So back to the game. What<br />
happens if Black plays 13. ...h6 as planned?<br />
Student: Let’s see...White still has to<br />
play 14. Bxf6, and Black will recapture with<br />
14. ...Qxf6, but then 15. e4 looks really<br />
strong. Black probably plays 15. ...dxe4, but<br />
August 2009 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Page 17
after 16. fxe4, he has to do something about<br />
the fork, and somehow not get overrun in<br />
the center and on the kingside. That looks<br />
like a major challenge.<br />
Master: A challenge? To be<br />
sure...Actually, it might be impossible. The<br />
game Leander-Kossin (ICCF 1990)<br />
continued 13. ...h6? 14. Bxf6 Qxf6 15. e4<br />
dxe4 16. fxe4 Qg5 17. e5 Bc7 18. Ne4 Qe7<br />
19. Nf6+! and Black was quickly crushed.<br />
Ulf Andersson at Belfort in 1988, which<br />
Garry won convincingly. Now the bishops<br />
were traded with 15. Bxe7 Rxe7, and once<br />
again Botvinnik holds back his central<br />
advance. Kasparov evaluates Black’s<br />
position after 16. e4 dxe4 17. fxe4 Ndf8 as<br />
being slightly inferior, but “perfectly<br />
defensible.” Instead, Botvinnik plays 16.<br />
Ng3, and after 16. ...Nf6, further supports<br />
his center with 17. Qf2. Keres now played<br />
17. ...Be6, reaching this position. What do<br />
you think? Is it time?<br />
Now it’s Keres’ turn to figure out how<br />
to deal with the changed realities. He chose<br />
to exchange the bishops with 14. ...Nd7,<br />
avoiding the complications arising from 14.<br />
...h6 15. Bxh6 gxh6 16. Bxg6 fxg6 17.<br />
Qxg6+ Kh8 18. Nf4 Bf8 19. Qf7 Bf5.<br />
So Black has to be really careful here.<br />
Keres clearly realized he’d made a mistake,<br />
and like most very strong players in such<br />
situations, he doesn’t ignore necessity. He<br />
simply retreats with 13. ...Be7. What now?<br />
Student: Well, e4 was the point, wasn’t<br />
it? (He plays 14. e4 and the Master replies<br />
14. ...dxe4, and after 15. fxe4, plays 15.<br />
...Ng4.) Hmm...you’ve got real counterplay,<br />
don’t you? Was my 14. e4 premature?<br />
Master: Uh huh. Actually, White needs<br />
to be quite careful about his timing. One of<br />
the most instructive things about this game<br />
is the way Botvinnik patiently holds back<br />
the e4 break until he has placed his pieces<br />
as optimally as possible.<br />
Student: I guess that make sense. After<br />
all, Black can’t really stop e4, can he?<br />
Master: Not easily. Now that the map<br />
has changed, Botvinnik starts repositioning<br />
his pieces. No minority attack today! The<br />
future is in the center, and so he centralizes<br />
his rook with 14. Rbe1. Notice that<br />
Botvinnik doesn’t try to “justify” the<br />
position of his rook on b1. It went there to<br />
support the queenside attack. The map has<br />
changed enough that another fundamental<br />
strategy—central advance—is now in play,<br />
and so Botvinnik adjusts his pieces<br />
accordingly.<br />
However, Botvinnik suggests Keres was<br />
perhaps wrong to do so. This may be Black’s<br />
best chance. In fact, “Little Miss Monster”<br />
thinks the chances are about level after 19.<br />
...Bf5.<br />
Student: Little Miss Monster? As in<br />
“Little Miss Silicon Monster?” (Thinks for<br />
a second and chuckles) Oh, I get it—Rybka<br />
means “little fish” in Czech and Polish,<br />
doesn’t it? And Vasik Rajlich—Rybka’s<br />
programmer—always refers to the program<br />
as female. Cute.<br />
Master: A little light relief...Another<br />
possibility is 14. ...c5. What do you think?<br />
Student: Don’t like it much...after 15.<br />
dxc5 Bxc5 16. Bxf6 gxf6 and 17. Nd4,<br />
Black’s pawn structure is shattered. That’s<br />
likely to be a nightmare against any strong<br />
Grandmaster, never mind Botvinnik. After<br />
14. ...Be6, does White play 15. e4<br />
immediately?<br />
Master: Probably. Kasparov notes the<br />
play is likely to be similar to his game against<br />
Student: Let’s see: if White plays 18.<br />
e4, Black responds 18. ...dxe4 19. fxe4, and<br />
then presses the White center with 19.<br />
...Rd7. White probably has to defend with<br />
20. Nge2, and then it’s not so clear how he<br />
goes forward. It looks like he has the<br />
advantage, but I also don’t see how he does<br />
much with it. So maybe White waits a bit<br />
longer. Can he further improve his knight?<br />
Master: Smack on! Instead of rushing<br />
forward, Botvinnik played 18. Nf5, and we<br />
reach another critical juncture in the game.<br />
What do you think Black should do here?<br />
Student: Well, that knight looks pretty<br />
dangerous, but I’m not crazy about 18.<br />
...Bxf5 19. Bxf5, either. I’m not sure,<br />
perhaps Black should simply retreat with 18.<br />
...Re8, or maybe consider 18. ...Rd7 with<br />
the hope of creating pressure against the<br />
center.<br />
Master: Interestingly, the two major<br />
commentators on this game—teacher and<br />
student: Botvinnik and Kasparov—seem to<br />
disagree at this point. Botvinnik writes: “If<br />
18. ...Re8 then there would have followed<br />
19. g4 and then after the exchange on f5<br />
White would have recaptured with the g-<br />
pawn, causing Black fresh problems.” One<br />
has the impression that Botvinnik assumed<br />
the exchange on f5 was ultimately<br />
Page 18 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009
inevitable. Kasparov clearly has a different<br />
viewpoint, and comments: “But Black<br />
should not have exchanged on f5 in any case,<br />
since now White’s attack develops swiftly<br />
and unhindered.”<br />
Student: So Keres took the knight?<br />
Master: He did, and after 18. ...Bxf5?!<br />
19. Bxf5 Qb6 Botvinnik finally decided the<br />
time was ripe, and played 20. e4. Now what<br />
should Keres do?<br />
Student: “To capture, or not to<br />
capture...that is the question...” Here I want<br />
pressure against the pawns, so maybe 20.<br />
...dxe4 21. fxe4 Rd8.<br />
Master: That’s the way it was played.<br />
However, it’s not clear that’s the best option.<br />
Botvinnik notes: “By opening the position<br />
Black hopes to gain at least some counterchances,<br />
but in the process White’s activity<br />
also increases!” Black’s position is no fun,<br />
in any case. However, Black might have kept<br />
it closed with something like 20. ...Rae8,<br />
though admittedly 21. e5 Nd7 22. Bxd7<br />
Rxd7 23. f4 looks clearly better for White.<br />
In any case, the game continued 20. ...dxe4<br />
21. fxe4 Rd8 22. e5 Nd5. Now how should<br />
White continue?<br />
Student: A few years ago, I’d probably<br />
have been so scared of Black’s “well-posted<br />
knight” on d5 that I’d have chopped it off<br />
with 23. Nxd5.<br />
However, you’ve taught me that captures<br />
tend to be critical, because games are often<br />
decided by them. Now it seems clear to me<br />
that White’s c3-knight is the better piece.<br />
The d5-knight looks impressive, but really<br />
doesn’t have a lot to do. On the other hand,<br />
the white knight is eyeing d6.<br />
Master: Good for you! I doubt it took<br />
Botvinnik long to play 23. Ne4. Now Black<br />
might challenge the white knight with 23.<br />
...Nc7 24. Nd6 Ne8. What happens then?<br />
Student: Isn’t 25. Nxf7 just winning?<br />
25. ...Kxf7 26. Be6+ is terminal, and 25.<br />
...Rxf7 26. Be6 is no better.<br />
Master: You’re absolutely right.<br />
Interestingly, however, there’s another<br />
option as well.<br />
Student: Another option? Oh heck...25.<br />
Nc8 just forks queen and rook. How did I<br />
miss that?<br />
Master: I’m not sure, but virtually<br />
everyone seems to. Perhaps it has to do with<br />
the fact that White is playing on the kingside,<br />
and so it seems natural to look for a forcing<br />
sequence there. It’s also true that 25. Nc8<br />
Rxc8 26. Bxc8 is perhaps not as<br />
straightforward as 25. Nxf7.<br />
In any case, Keres—a fair country<br />
tactician himself—played 23. ...Nf8 instead,<br />
and after 24. Nd6 retreated his queen: 24.<br />
...Qc7 25. Be4. Now what?<br />
Student: I’d guess Keres snapped off the<br />
knight with 25. ...Rxd6. Isn’t the British<br />
name for a knight like that an “octopus?”<br />
Master: That it is, and it’s a great<br />
description—a secure knight on the sixth<br />
streches its tentacles everywhere. As it<br />
happens, Keres didn’t take the knight, which<br />
I also find rather surprising. I’d guess that’s<br />
a tribute to Botvinnik’s justly famous<br />
technical skills. Keres simply concluded<br />
there was no chance at all an exchange<br />
down, and leaving the knight on d6—while<br />
uncomfortable in the extreme—did leave at<br />
least some chance of a mistake.<br />
In his notes, Botvinnik suggests that<br />
Black could have put up stiffer resistance<br />
with 25. ...Rxd6 26. exd6 Qxd6, though it<br />
wouldn’t have changed the ultimate<br />
outcome, “if only because of the line 27.<br />
Bxd5 cxd5 28. Re5.” The game went on 25.<br />
...Ne6 26. Qh4 g6 27. Bxd5 cxd5. Now what<br />
would you play?<br />
Student: The obvious move is 28. Re3,<br />
but then perhaps Black will sacrifice the<br />
exchange. I don’t see any point in allowing<br />
that if I can help it. Oh there’s an idea: the<br />
queen has to stay on the seventh rank to<br />
defend the rook. So on 28. Rc1, Black has<br />
to play 28. ...Qd7, and now there’s no<br />
exchange sacrifice.<br />
Master: Good for you! Among many<br />
other things, Botvinnik was a brilliant<br />
technician. He understood all about shutting<br />
down counterplay. As you’ve suggested, he<br />
continued 28. Rc1 Qd7, and then aimed his<br />
rook at the kingside with 29. Rc3. Here<br />
Keres played 29. ...Rf8. What’s his idea?<br />
August 2009 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Page 19
Student: Well, resignation seems like an<br />
option. (The Master smiles.) But assuming<br />
that Keres isn’t quite ready for that, let’s see.<br />
He can’t take the knight: 30. ...gxf5 31. Rg3+<br />
Ng7 32. Qf6 is just mate, and 31. ...Kh8 32.<br />
Qf6+ is the same thing. So the obvious move<br />
is 30. ...Ree8. What then? Oh...31. Qf6<br />
threatens mate, so 31. ...h5 looks necessary.<br />
larger game: 31. Nh6+ Kf8 32. Qf6 Ng7<br />
33. Rcf3. What’s his threat now?<br />
Student: Okay, if 30. Rh3, what then?<br />
He’ll have to play 30. ...f6 to defend h7. No,<br />
wait, he’ll play 30. ...f5!, won’t he. Then 31.<br />
exf6?? allows 32. Qxd6 when White can’t<br />
take the rook because of the back row mate.<br />
That’s what the rook is doing on f8. And if<br />
White can’t take en passant, Black’s position<br />
will be much harder to crack.<br />
Master: Exactly. So Botvinnik brought<br />
his knight to the kingside with the powerful<br />
30. Nf5. So what does Black do now?<br />
Then 32. Nh6+ Kh7 33. Nxf7 will finish<br />
things in short order.<br />
Master: All true. Keres actually played<br />
30. ...Rfe8, perhaps hoping Botvinnik would<br />
settle for winning an exchange. However,<br />
the World Champion stayed focused on<br />
Student: Mate in three: 34.Qxf7+ Rxf7<br />
35.Rxf7+ Qxf7 36.Rxf7#<br />
Master: I didn’t think that would slow<br />
you down. Keres played 33. ...Rc8, and<br />
Botvinnik closed out the game with 34. Nxf7<br />
Re6 35. Qg5 Nf5 36. Nh6 Qg7 37. g4 and<br />
Black Resigned.<br />
1-0<br />
<strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Subscription, State <strong>Chess</strong> Federation Membership Form<br />
Adult: $25/year (12 issues) via periodicals mail each month.<br />
One-year membership in the Oregon or Washington <strong>Chess</strong> Federation included for residents of OR and WA.<br />
Junior: $17/year (12 issues) or Scholastic: $10/6 months (6 issues, convertable to regular junior membership by paying $7 before<br />
expiration). Must be under age 20 at time of expiration. OR/WA residents only; state membership included.<br />
Family: $5/year (not a subscription — membership only). Open only to a co-resident of an Adult or Junior member. Expires at<br />
the same time. If first member is a junior ($17/year), additional family member(s) must also be juniors.<br />
Additional postage required for foreign addresses (contact Business Manager for amount). Inquire about special rates for<br />
libraries and school chess clubs.<br />
For general information, Eric Holcomb (541) 647-1021, e-mail: Eric@Holcomb.com<br />
OCF/WCF Membership Application/Renewal Form<br />
Name _____________________________________________ If Junior, give date of birth ____________<br />
E-Mail (used for renewal notices and tournament announcements) ____________________________________________<br />
Phone Number (optional, not used for telemarketing) (_____)_______________ Country (if not USA) ___________<br />
Street or P.O. Box _______________________________________________________________________<br />
City ____________________________________________ State __________ Zip __________________<br />
Membership Type(s) __________________________ Total Membership Amount $ ________________<br />
WA residents only: sales tax based on location where magazine will be received.<br />
Tax jurisdiction: ________________Sales tax rate: ______% Tax on membership amount: $_________<br />
Total: $__________<br />
A tax rate table is available on the <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> website. WA Memberships received without<br />
the correct tax will be valid for 11 months instead of 12 (5 months for scholastic option).<br />
Make check or money order (USA $ only)<br />
payable to <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> and mail to:<br />
Eric Holcomb<br />
NW <strong>Chess</strong> Business Manager<br />
1900 NE Third St, Ste 106-361<br />
Bend OR 97701-3889<br />
Page 20 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009
58 th Annual Oregon Open<br />
September 5, 6 & 7, 2009<br />
6-round Swiss: 2 sections, Open & Reserve (under 1800)<br />
Time Control: 40 moves in 2 hours, then sudden death in 1 hour (40/2; SD/1)<br />
Registration: Saturday 9-10:30 am<br />
Rounds: Saturday 11 & 5:30; Sunday 9:30 & 5:30; Monday 9 & 3<br />
Location: Mt. Hood Community College, Vista Room; 26000 SE Stark, Gresham<br />
Check www.pdxchess.org for directions to playing site<br />
Organizer: Portland <strong>Chess</strong> Club Byes: 2 Byes available, request before Rd 1<br />
$3,000 Guaranteed<br />
$1500 in each Section<br />
Increased at discretion of Organizer if more that 100 non-junior players<br />
Open: 1 st $550; 2 nd $300; 3 rd $200 U2000: 1 st $200; 2 nd $150; 3 rd $100<br />
Reserve: 1 st $370; 2 nd $220; 3 rd $130 U1600, U1400, U1200 each $130-80-50<br />
Unrated players limited to class prizes of $100 in Open, $60 in reserve<br />
Special Prizes: $200 bonus for perfect score in Open Section;<br />
Martha Jane Miller Memorial prize of $100 to highest scoring female player<br />
Entry: $60; $50 for PCC members who register by September 3<br />
Juniors (under 19) may pay $15 and compete for non-cash prizes in Reserve<br />
Section (no PCC discount)<br />
Memberships: USCF and OCF/WCF required (OSA) Harmon Grand Prix.<br />
Other: Annual Oregon <strong>Chess</strong> Federation general membership meeting will take<br />
place at 3:30 pm on Sunday.<br />
Name________________________________________________________________________________________<br />
Address _____________________________________________________________________________________<br />
USCF ID # ________________ USCF Exp ____________ OCF/WCF Exp _____________ Rating ________<br />
Email ________________________________________________ Section _____________ Bye Rds __________<br />
Entries: Payable to Portland <strong>Chess</strong> Club; mail to Mike Morris, 2344 NE 27 th Ave., Portland, OR 97212<br />
August 2009 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Page 21
y<br />
Michael Lee<br />
The<br />
World<br />
Open<br />
14. ...Ng6 15. g3<br />
Preventing ...Nf4.<br />
15. ...g4<br />
15. ...f4? 16. g4 +/-.<br />
due to his inability to attack on the locked<br />
kingside.<br />
20. Rb1 a5 21. Nb5<br />
Tightening White’s grip on Black’s<br />
position. 21. a3 a4! is unclear.<br />
21. ...Ra6!?<br />
To allow ...Bd7.<br />
22. Qf2 Bd7 23. Rf1 Nh8<br />
23. ...Qe7 24. Nc7 Rb6 25. Nb1 +/-.<br />
Coming into this round on plus one (4.5/<br />
8), having just drawn a crushing game<br />
against Marc Esserman, I thought I’d have<br />
to win with black to secure the norm, given<br />
that the average rating of my opponents was<br />
about 2410(FIDE). GM Bhat had a bit of a<br />
rough tournament, but still was a formidable<br />
opponent, and the fourth GM I faced as black<br />
(the fifth GM in all). Knowing that Vinay is<br />
more of a positional player, I chose to play<br />
the King’s Indian, an aggressive and<br />
unbalanced opening. However, he played an<br />
interesting sideline, and I was left with a<br />
position which I could only hope to draw.<br />
After a few errors by my opponent, I held a<br />
difficult endgame, and then found out I had<br />
earned my first IM norm!<br />
Vinay Bhat – Michael Lee<br />
World Open, Round 9<br />
Philadephia, Pennsylvania, July 5, 2009<br />
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6<br />
5. Nf3 0-0 6. Be2 e5 7. Be3<br />
7. 0-0 is the main line.<br />
16. fxg4<br />
I was hoping for 16. exf5 gxf3 17. fxg6<br />
fxe2 18. gxh7+ Kh8 19. Qxe2 Bh3 20. Rfe1<br />
Ng4 21. Nde4 Bh6 with compensation.<br />
Despite being two pawns down, Black has<br />
locked up White’s position and is prepared<br />
to double rooks on the f-file.<br />
16. ...Nxg4<br />
16. ...f4!?.<br />
17. Bxg4 fxg4 18. Be3! +=<br />
Preventing ...Bh6. Here, I realized that<br />
any kingside attack would be useless, and I<br />
would have to try to defend the queenside<br />
to hold a draw.<br />
18. ...Rxf1+ 19. Qxf1?!<br />
24. Nb1!<br />
Black has no counterplay, and can only<br />
try to defend the position. His only hope lies<br />
in the blocked position.<br />
24. ...h6 25. N1c3 Bc8 26. Bd2 Qe7<br />
With the idea of an eventual ...b6, Ra8-<br />
b8-b7.<br />
27. b3 Nf7<br />
7. ...Ng4 8. Bg5 f6 9. Bh4 Nc6 10. d5<br />
28. Qxf7+?!<br />
Ne7 11. Nd2 Nh612. f3 g5!?<br />
A slight misplay, allowing ...c5. 19. Nxf1<br />
Played quickly; White tries to force<br />
12. ...c5 is more popular.<br />
c5?! 20. dxc6 bxc6 21. c5 +=.<br />
things. 28. a3 +/- planning to break through<br />
13. Bf2 f5 14. 0-0!?<br />
on the queenside: 28. ...b6?? 29. Qxf7+ +-.<br />
19. ...c5!<br />
A rare variation that promises White a<br />
28. ...Qxf7 29.Rxf7 Kxf7 30. Nc7<br />
Otherwise c5 and Black slowly loses,<br />
slight but definite edge. 14. c5 is usual.<br />
The idea: the rook is trapped, and White<br />
Page 22 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009
threatens the numerous weaknesses in the<br />
Black position: a5, d6, and h6.<br />
35. ...Kxg5 36. Kg2 Bd7 37. Nd1 Bc8<br />
38. Nf2<br />
30. ...Bf8?<br />
30. ...b6! 31. N3b5 Ke7 32. Nxa6 Bxa6<br />
33. Nc7 Bb7 34. Ne6 Kf6 +=; 30... Rb6?<br />
31. N3b5! +-.<br />
31. Nxa6 bxa6 32. a4?<br />
32. Na4 Bd7 33. Nb6 Ke8 34. Bxa5 +-.<br />
32. ...Be7!?<br />
Valuing the a-pawn higher than the h-<br />
pawn, due to it’s grip on theWhite queenside.<br />
33. Bxh6 Kg6 34. Bd2 Bg5! 35. Bxg5?!<br />
Black can hold this position, despite<br />
being a pawn down. 35. Be1 Bd8 36. Nd1<br />
+/- with better winning chances.<br />
38. ...Kh5<br />
38. ...Bd7?? The trap that Vinay<br />
attempted to trick me into over the next fifty<br />
moves: if Black’s king is on g5 in this<br />
position, h3 wins. 39. h3! gxh3+ 40. Nxh3+<br />
Kh5 41. Nf2 Bc8 42. Nd1 Bd7 43. Ne3 Kg5<br />
44. Kf3 +-.<br />
39. Nd1<br />
39. h3 does not win now, due to a nice<br />
endgame trick: 39. ...gxh3+ 40. Nxh3 Bg4!<br />
41. Nf2 Be2! 42. Kh3 Bf1+ 43. Kh2 Be2 =.<br />
39. ...Bd7 40. Ne3 Kg5 41. Kf2 Bc8 42.<br />
Ke1 Bd7 43. Kd2 Bc8 44. Kc3 Bd7 45. Kb2<br />
Kf6 46. Nd1 Ke7 47. Nf2 Kf6 48. Ka3<br />
Black has to be a little careful. White<br />
can always threaten Nb5 or b4 if Black’s<br />
king strays too far.<br />
48. ...Ke7 49. Nd1 Kf6 50. Ne3 Bc8 51.<br />
Nc2 Bd7 52. Ne1Bc8 53. Nd3 Bd7 54. Nf2<br />
Bc8 55. Kb2 Bd7 56. Kc2 Bc8 57. Kd2 Bd7<br />
58. Ke1 Kg5 59.Kf1 Kh5 60. Kg1 Bc8 61.<br />
Kg2 Bd7 62. Nd1 Kg5 63. Nc3 Bc8 64. Kf2<br />
Kf6 65. Ke3 Bd7 66. Kd3 Bc8 67. Kd2 Bd7<br />
68. Kc1 Bc8 69. Kb2 Ke7 70. Ka3 Bd7 71.<br />
Nd1 Kf6 72. Ne3 Bc8 73. Nc2 Bd7 74. Ne1<br />
Bc8 75. Nd3 Bd7 76. Nf2 Bc8 77. Nd1 Bd7<br />
78. Nc3 Ke7 79. Nd1<br />
About to reach fifty moves, Vinay offers<br />
a draw.<br />
½–½<br />
CHESS CLUBS, CAMPS & PRIVATE INSTRUCTION<br />
Pete Prochaska<br />
USCF <strong>Chess</strong> Master & CEO<br />
2373 NW 185th Avenue #261<br />
Hillsboro, OR 97124<br />
Phone: 503-504-5756<br />
pete@chessodyssey.com<br />
www.chessodyssey.com<br />
August 2009 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Page 23
This month we look at the theory of<br />
R+BP+RP vs. R. I will make use of the<br />
normal convention and assume that it is<br />
White that has the extra material. Unless the<br />
black king is cut-off from the kingside,<br />
White’s primary winning chance is using<br />
one of his pawns as a decoy. Having said<br />
that, using the h-pawn as a decoy is logical<br />
since there are more R+P vs. R winning<br />
position with an f-pawn as opposed to an h-<br />
pawn. However, even after the black king<br />
takes the h-pawn decoy, it stands well on<br />
the short side, and with correct defense a<br />
drawn position should be reached. Before<br />
tackling R+BP+RP vs. R, let’s look at<br />
several R+BP vs. R positions with the black<br />
king correctly placed on the short side.<br />
Position #1<br />
This position is a dead draw; there is<br />
nothing White can do to improve his<br />
position. For example 1. Rd1 Ra7+ etc.<br />
While simple, this is important to know<br />
since it is the normal end result when White<br />
uses his rook to shield the king from side<br />
checks on the d-file instead of the e-file.<br />
Position #2<br />
And In The End<br />
by Dana Muller<br />
This is a standard draw. The play is quite<br />
simple: if the white rook isn’t on the f-file,<br />
then keep your defending rook behind the<br />
pawn on the f-file. If White moves his rook<br />
to the f-file, then move your rook to the a-<br />
file for side checks.<br />
1. Ke6 Kg7<br />
The king holds back the pawn.<br />
2. Re7+ Kf8 3. Rf7+ Kg8 4. Ra7 Kf8<br />
5. Kf6 Kg8 6. Ra8+ Kh7<br />
And we are back where we started.<br />
1. Rf8 Ra1 2. Kg5<br />
Other king moves allow a barrage of<br />
checks on the long-side; rook moves are<br />
answered by Rf2.<br />
2. ...Rg1+<br />
And the check barrage is from the back<br />
instead of the long side.<br />
Position #3<br />
This is another typical king on the short<br />
side position, it is critical in the sense that<br />
whoever has the move gets their desired<br />
result. This sort of position with White to<br />
play is White’s main goal in the more<br />
complex R+BP+RP vs. R ending. Needless<br />
to say, Black doesn’t have to allow it.<br />
White to play:<br />
1. Kf8 Kg6 2. f7 Rb7 3. Re6+ Kh7 4.<br />
Rf6 Ra7 5. Ke8 Ra8+ 6. Ke7 Ra7+ 7. Ke6<br />
Ra6+ 8. Ke5<br />
And wins, as now further checks are<br />
answered by marching the king toward the<br />
rook.<br />
Black to play draws:<br />
1. ...Rb7+ 2. Re7<br />
If 2. Kf8 then 2. ...Kg6.<br />
2. ...Rb8<br />
The key move – stopping the white king<br />
from reaching f8. Other moves lose, i.e. 2.<br />
...Rb6 3. Kf8+ Kg6 4. f7 Rb8+ 5. Re8 Rb7<br />
6. Re6+ Kh7 7. Rf6.<br />
3. Ke6+<br />
The alternatives 3. Re8 Rb7+ repeating,<br />
or 3. Rd7 Ra8 or 3. Ra7 Kh6 don’t improve.<br />
3. ...Kg6 4. Rg7+ Kh6 5. Rg1<br />
Cutting off the king and trying to reach<br />
the Lucena position, but...<br />
5. ...Rb6+<br />
And the black keeps checking, if the<br />
white king approaches the black rook, then<br />
the black rook attacks the f-pawn<br />
Now that we are experts at R+BP vs. R,<br />
lets move on to some R+BP+RP vs. R<br />
positions. The generic advice on playing<br />
black is to keep the king on g7 as long as<br />
possible and answer any pawn checks by<br />
moving in front of that pawn.<br />
The rook is often best placed on a1 ready<br />
to give checks from behind or along the a-<br />
file as needed. Sometimes posting the rook<br />
on the f-file behind the white f-pawn can be<br />
effective. There is one other consideration<br />
not always mentioned: if the white pawns<br />
are not advanced very far and the black king<br />
is cut-off from the h-pawn by the white rook<br />
on the g-file, then use a frontal attack (e.g.<br />
Rh8) on the h-pawn. This may sound<br />
obscure, but it will make sense after<br />
reviewing the game Keres – Sokolsky.<br />
The first three examples are what Black<br />
must avoid (or what White is trying to<br />
achieve). The next two examples show<br />
Black successfully defending.<br />
Page 24 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009
Position #4<br />
(Black’s king is cut off on the back rank.)<br />
If 2. ...Kxh6 3. Kf8 wins as in #3 above.<br />
3. Re8 Ra7+ 4. Ke6 Ra6+ 5. Kf5 Ra5+<br />
6. Re5 Ra1 7. f7 Rf1+ 8. Ke6 Kg6<br />
White has multiple ways of winning<br />
from here: 1.f6, 1.h6, and 1. Rb8+ all win.<br />
We will focus on 1. h6.<br />
1. h6 Rc1<br />
Preparing to harass the white king with<br />
checks from behind.<br />
2. f6 Rg1+<br />
White threatened both 3. Rb8+ and 3.<br />
Rg7+.<br />
3. Kf5 Rf1+ 4. Ke6 Re1+ 5. Kd6!<br />
White can still go wrong with 5. Kd7?<br />
Kf7 6. h7 Rh1 drawing. The point of the<br />
side step is to cross the seventh rank on e7<br />
denying the black king access to f7.<br />
5. ...Rd1+<br />
Alternatives 5. ...Rf1 6. Rb8+ Kh7 7.<br />
Ke7 and 5. ...Rh1 6.Rb8+ Kf7 7. h7 win<br />
quickly for White.<br />
6. Ke7 Re1+ 7. Kd8 Rf1<br />
If 7. ...Kf8 8. Rg7 idea 9. h7 wins. If 7.<br />
...Rd1+ 8. Ke8 Re1+ 9. Re7 wins.<br />
8. h7+ Kh8 9. Ke7<br />
The hasty 9. f7 allows 9. ...Rxf7<br />
drawing! (10. Rxf7 is stalemate.)<br />
9. ...Re1+ 10. Kf7 Ra1 11. Rb8+ Kxh7<br />
12. Kf8<br />
Winning as in #3 above.<br />
Position #5<br />
(White has penetrated to f7 without<br />
making any concessions)<br />
White wins regardless of who is on<br />
move (see variation C for White moving<br />
first).<br />
(A)<br />
1. ...Ra8 2. Re8 Ra7+ 3. Kf8 Kxh6 4.<br />
Re6+ Kg5<br />
(forced)<br />
5. f6 Kf5 6. Rb6 Kg6 7. f7+ Kh7 8. Rb8<br />
Idea of 9. Ke8, 10. f8(Q) wins.<br />
(B)<br />
1. ...Ra7+ 2. Kf8 Ra8+ 3. Re8 Ra6<br />
Holding up f6.<br />
4. Re7+ Kh8 5. Re6 Ra8+<br />
Else White plays 6. f6.<br />
6. Re8 Ra6<br />
If 6. ...Ra7 then 7. f6 wins as in #3 above.<br />
7. f6! Rxf6+ 8. Ke7+<br />
Winning the rook<br />
(C)<br />
1. ...Ra2<br />
Waiting; this is equivalent to White<br />
moving first. Black allows the pawn to reach<br />
f6 before beginning side checks.<br />
2. f6 Ra8<br />
Black seems to be ready to corral the<br />
dangerous f-pawn, but...<br />
9. Rg5+! Kxg5 10. h7<br />
Wins! One of the pawns will queen.<br />
White escapes rook checks by heading to<br />
f8, i.e.<br />
10. ...Re1+ 11. Kd7 Rd1+ 12. Ke8 Re1+<br />
13. Kf8 Rh1 14. Kg8<br />
Position #6<br />
(Advance of the h-pawn with the black<br />
king cut-off.)<br />
We will look at the stem game for this<br />
plan: Keres – Sokolsky.<br />
1. ...Ra8(?)<br />
The simplest defensive plan is the play<br />
1. ...Kf6 2. h4 Rh5, transferring the rook to<br />
fifth rank.<br />
2. h4 Ra1?<br />
While the prior move was imprecise, this<br />
is a mistake. While it follows the<br />
conventional wisdom that the black rook is<br />
often best placed on a1, it ignore the<br />
specifics of this particular position: the h-<br />
August 2009 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Page 25
pawn is able to move forward at such a time<br />
when the black king can’t blockade it. 2.<br />
...Rh8 is best, e.g. 3. Rg5+ Kf6 4. Kg4 Ra8<br />
(now that the white rook can’t move behind<br />
the h-pawn, activating the rook is best) 5. h5<br />
Ra1 6. Rg6+ Kf7 7. f4 Ra5 gives a drawn<br />
Gligoric – Smyslov type of position.<br />
3. h5 Ra6<br />
Preparing to blockade the h-pawn on the<br />
third rank. If 3. ...Rh1 then 4. Rh4 Rg1+ 5.<br />
Kf2 Rg7 6. h6 Rh7 7. Kg3 winning. The<br />
black rook is tied to h7 (any rook move is<br />
answered by pawn to h7), the black king will<br />
be slowly forced back (often via zugswang)<br />
by a general advance of the white king and<br />
the f-pawn. Note that while Black can’t<br />
move his rook, White has the freedom of<br />
moving his rook along the h-file.<br />
4. Rh4 Rh6<br />
Per plan, White now maneuvers so that<br />
the rook once again cuts off the black king<br />
and the white king protects the h-pawn.<br />
5. Rf4+ Kg5 6. Rg4+ Kf5<br />
6. ...Kxh5 7. Rh4+ and 6. ...Kf6 7. Rg6+<br />
both lead to a won king and pawn ending for<br />
White.<br />
7. Kh4<br />
7. ...Rh8<br />
Not many choices. 7. ...Kf6 8. Rg6+ still<br />
wins for White. 7. ...Ra6 8. Rg5+ Kf4 9. Rg6<br />
idea of Rf6+ also wins for White.<br />
8. Rg5+ Kf6 9. Kg4 Kf7<br />
Black is trying to get his king in position<br />
to blockade the h-pawn (freeing the rook).<br />
10. Rf5+!<br />
Best. 10. Ra5 Rg8+ 11. Kf5 Kg7, and<br />
Black has successfully regrouped into a<br />
drawable position.<br />
10. ...Kg7 11. Kg5 Rg8 12. Rf6 Kh7+<br />
13. Rg6 Ra8<br />
Black has managed to get his king into<br />
the proper position, but White’s forces are<br />
better coordinated than those in the note to<br />
White’s 10th. Essentially, White is preparing<br />
to get an improved (h-pawn is on h5 not h6<br />
and is therefore less vulnerable) sort of #5<br />
winning position.<br />
14. f4 Ra1 15. Re6 Rg1+ 16. Kf6 Rf1<br />
Attacking the h-pawn with 16. ...Rh1<br />
loses after 17. f5 Rxh5 18. Re7+ Kh6 19.<br />
Re8 Kh7 20. Ke6 idea 21. f6.<br />
17. f5 Rf2<br />
Trying to hold up the advance of the f-<br />
pawn. If 17. ...Kh6 then 18. Kf7+ Kxh5 19.<br />
f6 Kh6 20. Kf8 wins.<br />
18. Re5 Rh2<br />
Desperate, but moving the rook to the a-<br />
file for checks doesn’t work either. 18. ...Ra2<br />
19. Kf7 produces a win.<br />
19. Re7+ Kh6 20. Re8 Kh7 21. Ke6<br />
Re2+ 22. Kf7 Ra2 23. f6 Ra6 24. Ke7 Ra7+<br />
25. Kf8 Ra6<br />
Note that if the h-pawn is on h6 instead<br />
of h5, then 25. ...Kg6 draws. The rest is easy.<br />
26. f7 Ra7 27. Re6 Ra1 28. Ke7<br />
1-0<br />
Position #7<br />
(Bondarevsky – Keres. An example of<br />
White trying unsuccessfully for winning<br />
position #6.)<br />
If White could magically move his king<br />
to f7 he would be winning as above.<br />
1. ...Rg2<br />
Simplest. Black prevents the white king<br />
from invading via g5. However, allowing the<br />
white king to g5 is not fatal: 1. ...Rf2+ 2.<br />
Kg5 Rg2+ 3. Kf6 Rf2! holds up the f-pawn.<br />
The difference between this position and the<br />
later stages of Keres – Sokolsky (#6) is the<br />
placement of the h-pawn. On h5 it prevents<br />
the black king from accessing g6 and forces<br />
the black king one square further up the<br />
board to capture. This enough to change the<br />
position into a draw.<br />
2. Ke5 Ra2<br />
Also playable is 2. ...Re2+ 3. Kf6 Rf2 as<br />
in the above note.<br />
3. Kd6<br />
If 3. Kf6? then 3. ...Kxh6 4. Kf7+ Kh7 5.<br />
f6 Ra8 with a standard draw.<br />
3. ...Ra5<br />
Again, 3. ...Rf2 works: 4. f6 Kxh6 5. Ke7<br />
Kg6 6. Re1 Ra2 draws.<br />
4. f6 Kg6<br />
Simpler is 4. ...Kxh6 5. Ke7 Ra8 =.<br />
5. Re8 Ra6+ 6. Ke7 Rxf6 7. Rg8+ Kh7<br />
8. Rg7+ Kh8 9. Kxf6<br />
½–½<br />
Stalemate!<br />
Page 26 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009
Position #8<br />
This is a classic in the R+BP+RP arena:<br />
Gligoric – Smyslov. Smyslov’s copybook<br />
play is so impressive that Dvoretsky is of<br />
the opinion that a careful study of this one<br />
game should suffice for the practical player.<br />
1. Rg6+<br />
This gives Black a choice for the king.<br />
Either is sufficient; we’ll look at both.<br />
(A)<br />
1. ...Kh7<br />
This eliminates any threat of an h-pawn<br />
advance, but it does open the door for the<br />
white king to advance to f6. As seen<br />
previously, allowing the king to f6 is not fatal<br />
if the black pieces are properly placed.<br />
2. f5 Rb1 3. Kg5 Rg1+ 4. Kf6 Ra1<br />
Standard play: check once on either a<br />
rank or the g-file and then return to base (a1).<br />
5. Rg2<br />
The alternative is 5. Ke6, trying to<br />
directly advance the f-pawn. After 5. ...Ra6+<br />
6. Ke5 Ra5+ 7. Kf4 Ra1! 8. Re6 Kg7 9. h6+<br />
Kh7 10. Kg5 Rg1+, the position is drawn.<br />
5. ...Kh6!<br />
This is more to stop Kg5 rather than to<br />
make a threat to the h-pawn. If Black plays<br />
a tempo move instead (such as 5. ...Rb1),<br />
then Black’s position is critical, maybe<br />
losing. A possible line is 5. ...Rb1 6. Re2<br />
Rf1 (side checks seem to lose: 6. ...Ra6+ 7.<br />
Kf7 Ra7+ 8. Re7, and White advances the<br />
f-pawn) 7. Re5 Kh6 8. Kf7 Kxh5 9. f6+ Kh6<br />
10. Re2 Rf3 11. Rh2+ Kg5 12. Kg7 Rxf6<br />
13. Rg2+ Kf5 14. Rf2+ winning. There are<br />
many other tries for Black, but clearly he is<br />
walking a tightrope at best. The text avoids<br />
such adventures.<br />
6. Re2 Ra7!<br />
Checking would be fatal. 6. ...Ra6+ 7.<br />
Kf7 Kg5 8. h6! Rxh6 9. Kg7 Ra6 10 f6!<br />
winning (10. ... Rxf6 11. Rg2+ Kf5 12. Rf2+<br />
skewers the rook).<br />
7. Re1 Rb7<br />
Waiting for White to commit.<br />
8. Ke6<br />
8. Re8 Rb6+ 9. Kf7 Kg5 = (because there<br />
are no rook checks to skewer the black rook<br />
as in the variations given on moves five and<br />
six).<br />
8. ...Kxh5 9. f6 Kg6 10. Rg1+ Kh7 11.<br />
f7 Rb8<br />
And draws.<br />
(B)<br />
1. ...Kf7<br />
Smyslov’s choice.<br />
2. Rg5<br />
More dangerous is 2. Kh4 with the idea<br />
of Rg3 cutting off the black king and<br />
threatening an advance of the h-pawn<br />
(shades of Keres – Sokolsky).<br />
Waiting with 2. ...Ra5 is fatal: 3. Rg3<br />
Ra1 4. h6 Rh1+ 5. Kg5 Ra1 6. f5 Rb1 7.<br />
Rg4 Ra1 8. Rh4 Rg1+ 9. Kf4 Rf1+ 10. Kg4<br />
Rg1+ 11. Kf3 Rg8 12. h7 wins.<br />
Black must play 2. ... Rb1 to foil the plan:<br />
3. Kg5. As a practical chance 3. Rg3 is worth<br />
a try: if Black waits with 3. ...Rb1 then 4. h6<br />
transposes into the above variation. Of<br />
course Black needs to play 3. ...Rh1+, after<br />
which White should not be able to arrange<br />
both pawn to h6 and keep the black king<br />
from crossing to the g-file.<br />
After 2. ...Rb1 3. Kg5 Rg1+ 4. Kh6 Rf1<br />
5. Rg7+ Kf6 6. Rg8 Kf7 7. Rg4 Rh1 is<br />
drawn.<br />
2. ...Rb1!<br />
The right time to take up the flexible<br />
post.<br />
3. Rc5<br />
On 3. h6 Ra1! (not 3. ...Rg1+ 4. Kf5 Rh1<br />
5. Rg7+ winning) 4. h7 (4. Rh5 Kg8 5. h7+<br />
Kh8 6. f5 Ra4+ 7. Kg5 Ra6 =.) 4. ...Rg1+ 5.<br />
Kf3 Rh1 6. Ra5 Kg6 7. Ra7 Kf5 is equal<br />
3. ...Kf6 4. Rc6+<br />
4. ...Kg7!<br />
Black loses after 4. ...Kf7 5. Kg5 Rg1+<br />
6. Kf5 Rh1 7. Rc7+ and the black king is<br />
driven to the last rank.<br />
5. Kg5 Rg1+! 6. Kf5 Ra1<br />
The check and return to base theme.<br />
7. Rc7+ Kh6 8. Re7 Rb1<br />
Waiting tactics.<br />
9. Re8 Kg7<br />
The king should return to g7 whenever<br />
possible.<br />
10. Re5 Ra1 11. Rd5 Rf1<br />
11. ...Rb1 is good as well.<br />
12. Rd4 Ra1 13. Rd6 Ra5+ 14. Kg4<br />
Ra1<br />
August 2009 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Page 27
14. ...Rb5 15. Rg6+ would repeat the<br />
position after White’s first move!<br />
15. Re6 Rg1+ 16. Kf5 Ra1 17. h6+<br />
17. ...Kh7!<br />
A pawn check on the 6th rank should be<br />
answered by blockading with the king. We<br />
now have a position that is similar to #7<br />
above. The play now runs on another 16<br />
moves before the draw is agreed.<br />
18. Rd6 Ra2 19. Kg5 Rg2+ 20. Kf6<br />
Kxh6 21. Ke7+<br />
21. ...Kh7<br />
Or 21. ...Kg7 22. f5 Re2+ 23. Re6 Rf2<br />
24. f6+ Kg6 25. Rd6 (25. f7+ Kg7 =; 25.<br />
Re1 Ra2 26. Rg1+ Kh7 27. f7 Ra7+ =) 25.<br />
...Rf1 =.<br />
22. f5 Re2+ 23. Re6 Ra2 24. f6 Ra8!<br />
25. Kf7 Kh6 26. Re1 Ra7+ 27. Re7 Ra8<br />
28. Rd7 Kh7 29. Rd1 Ra7+ 30. Ke6 Ra6+<br />
31. Rd6 Ra8 32. Rd4 Kg8 33. Rg4+ Kf8<br />
½–½<br />
I Never Met A Book....<br />
IM John Donaldson<br />
NiC Yearbook 91<br />
The New in <strong>Chess</strong> Yearbook series continues to<br />
stay fresh and relevant after twenty five years of<br />
publication. Yearbook 91 (New in <strong>Chess</strong> 2009,<br />
www.newinchess.com, figurine algebraic, paperback,<br />
248 pages, $29.95) is no exception, with material<br />
ranging from an in depth analysis of the classic Kieseritzky Gambit<br />
encounter Rosanes-Anderssen, Breslau 1863, to important theoretical duels<br />
played at Linares 2009.<br />
Most of the surveys in the Yearbooks tend to concentrate on lines that<br />
are presently popular in top level Grandmaster chess and YB 91 is no<br />
exception as one can see from a list of the contents. This preference for<br />
topical is not surprising as these are the lines that the best players in the<br />
world feel are most important<br />
YB 91 Surveys<br />
Sicilian Defence - Najdorf Variation 6.Be3 Ng4 - SI 14.7 - Vilela<br />
Sicilian Defence - Dragon Variation 10...Rb8 - SI 18.16 - A.Kuzmin<br />
Sicilian Defence - Perenyi Attack 7.g4 - SI 19.14 - Karolyi<br />
Sicilian Defence - Rauzer Variation 7...Be7 - SI 27.10 - Galkin<br />
Sicilian Defence - Sveshnikov Variation 9.Nd5 - SI 37.8 - Rogozenco<br />
Sicilian Defence - Taimanov Variation 5...Qc7 - SI 40.2 - Fogarasi<br />
Sicilian Defence - Taimanov Variation 5...Qc7 - SI 40.4 - Adla/Glavina<br />
Sicilian Defence - Grand Prix Attack 5.Bc4 - SI 49.4 - Grivas<br />
King’s Fianchetto - 4.f4 Line; 4...a6 - KF 14.4 - Finkel<br />
French Defence - Rubinstein Variation 7.c3 - FR 7.4 - Finkel<br />
Caro-Kann Defence - Advance Variation 3.e5 - CK 4.1 - Landa<br />
Ruy Lopez - Exchange Variation 5...Bd6 - RL 8.7 - Boersma<br />
Ruy Lopez - Marshall Attack 15.Qe2 - RL 17.6 - Lukacs/Hazai<br />
Ruy Lopez - Zaitsev Variation 9...Bb7 - RL 26.8 - Van der Wiel<br />
Italian Game - Giuoco Piano 6...a6 - IG 2.10 - Tiviakov<br />
Scotch Opening - Mieses Variation 8...Ba6 - SO 4.4 - Greenfeld<br />
King’s Pawn Openings - Philidor Defence 7...a6 - KP 4.13 - A. Kuzmin<br />
Various Openings - Fajarowicz Gambit 3...Ne4 - VO 17.6 - Gutman<br />
Queen’s Gambit Declined - Tartakower Variation 8.g4 - QO 7.1 - Olthof<br />
Slav Defence - Slow Slav 4.e3 - SL 1.7 - Anka<br />
Slav Defence - Krause Variation 7...Nb6 - SL 4.5 - Lukacs/Hazai<br />
Slav Defence - Botvinnik Variation 16.Na4 - SL 7.8 - Palliser<br />
Catalan Opening - Open Variation 6...dc4 - CA 5.6 - Vladimirov<br />
Nimzo-Indian Defence - Classical Variation 4...0-0 - NI 24.13 - De Jong<br />
Nimzo-Indian Defence - Ragozin Variation 4.Nf3 d5 - NI 27.5 - Antic<br />
Nimzo-Indian Defence - Ragozin Variation 4.Nf3 d5 - NI 27.6 - Panczyk/Ilczuk<br />
Queen’s Indian Defence - ...c6, ...d5 System - QI 6.1 - Tiviakov<br />
Queen’s Indian Defence - Nimzowitsch Variation 4...Ba6 - QI 14.9 - Zakhartsov<br />
Grünfeld Indian Defence - 3.f3 Line - GI 1.1 - Mikhalevski<br />
Grünfeld Indan Defence - Accelerated Russian System 4.Qb3 - GI 3.1 - Ikonnikov<br />
King’s Indian Defence - Sämisch Variation 6...Nc6 - KI 35.10 - Kaufman<br />
Queen’s Pawn Openings - Colle System 4.dc5 - QP 6.4 - Panczyk/Ilczuk<br />
English Opening - Symmetrical Variation 4.g3 - EO 40.6 - Marin/Stoica<br />
Page 28 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009
Still what is popular for those over<br />
2600 FIDE and what holds court<br />
among mortals are not quite the<br />
same. The Forum section where<br />
readers and authors offer feedback on<br />
previous Yearbook articles as well as<br />
offering fresh material tends to<br />
balance things out with a lot of<br />
examination of double King pawn<br />
openings.<br />
Sosonko’s corner also helps to<br />
even the slate. In Yearbook 91 he<br />
pays tribute to Roman<br />
Dzindzichashvili who still is<br />
searching for new discoveries in the<br />
openings at age 65. Teaming up with<br />
his good friend Rybka, Roman has<br />
found an interesting novelty in the<br />
Max Lange Gambit used earlier this<br />
year by Sergey Movsesian at Wijk<br />
aan Zee to defeat Michael Adams.<br />
After 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5<br />
4. 0-0 Nf6 5. d4 Bxd4 6. Nxd4 Nxd4<br />
7. f4 d6 8. fxe5 dxe5 9. Bg5 Qe7 10.<br />
Na3 and now instead of the<br />
traditional 10. ...Be6 that has been<br />
in use for well over 100 hundred<br />
years ( and was Adams choice) check<br />
out R and Rs suggestion - the<br />
mysterious 10. ...Rg8!, anticipating<br />
Bxf6 gxf6.<br />
Another R and R rehabilitation in<br />
museum openings occurs in the<br />
Giuoco Piano line favored by<br />
Rossolimo: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3.<br />
Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4<br />
Bb4+ 7. Bd2 Bxd2+ 8. Nbxd2 d5 9.<br />
exd5 Nxd5 10. Qb3 where 10. ...Na5<br />
11. Qa4 Nc6 12. Qb3 Na5 13. Qa4<br />
Nc6 of Miles – Korchnoi,<br />
Johannesburg 1979, was long<br />
thought to be the last word. R and R<br />
offer 12. Qa3 when 12. ...Qe7 13.<br />
Qxe7 surprisingly leads to a much<br />
better ending for White as his activity<br />
more than compensates for the<br />
isolated pawn.<br />
Returning to the Surveys those<br />
that like to play chess and not worry<br />
about long forcing lines will<br />
appreciate the contribution by GM<br />
Sergey Tiviakov who examines the<br />
position that is reached after several<br />
move orders but principally 1. d4 Nf6<br />
2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 c6 5. Bg2 d5<br />
6. 0-0 Be7 7. Nc3 Bb7. As Tiviakov<br />
points out Black avoids the popular<br />
7. d5 in the main line of the ...Bb7<br />
QID Fianchetto and the moves ...c6,<br />
...Bb7, ...Be7 and ...d5 can be played<br />
using different move orders.<br />
Tiviakov often delays the<br />
development of his QB until White<br />
has committed his QN and even more<br />
importantly delays committing his<br />
QN as long as possible retaining the<br />
option to develop it at a6 or b7. This<br />
is particularly relevant in the Closed<br />
Catalan variation (1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6<br />
3. g3 d5 4. Bg2 Be7 5. Nf3 0-0 6.<br />
0-0 c6 7. Qc2 b6 8. Nbd2 Bb7 9. e4)<br />
independently advocated for White<br />
by GMs Avrukh and Davies in their<br />
respective books 1. d4 - Volume One<br />
and Play The Catalan. Both do a fine<br />
job of analyzing the lines after 9.<br />
...Nbd7 but fail to consider 9. ...Na6.<br />
This move, used by both Tiviakov<br />
and the young Argentine-Canadian<br />
GM Anton Kovalyov, is much better<br />
in this position keeping d7 free for<br />
the KN in the event of e4-e5.<br />
I must confess that the survey on<br />
the English Hedgehog by Mihail<br />
Marin and Valentin Stoica has me<br />
mystified. The line the two<br />
Romanians focus on reaches its<br />
tabiya after 1. c4 c5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3.<br />
Nc3 e6 4. g3 b6 5. Bg2 Bb7 6. 0-0<br />
a6 7. d4 cxd4 8. Qxd4 d6 9. Rd1<br />
Nbd7 10. Ng5 Bxg2 11. Kxg2 Rc8<br />
12. Nge4 Rc6. The authors’ final<br />
conclusion is that after 13. Bf4<br />
“Black does not have an obvious<br />
route to equality.” This would seem<br />
to be great news for those seeking a<br />
strong weapon to combat the tough<br />
to crack Hedgehog but unfortunately<br />
it leaves unanswered the question of<br />
how to answer 11. ...Be7 (in place of<br />
11. ...Rc8). Black’s idea, as shown<br />
by Gavrikov and Adorjan close to<br />
thirty years ago, is to meet 12. Nge4<br />
with 12. ...0-0 13. Nxd6 Qc7. Does<br />
White have something new here?<br />
English GM Glenn Flear has been<br />
the closer for the Yearbooks for some<br />
time, his book reviews appearing at<br />
the very end of the volume. This time<br />
around he looks at Alexander<br />
Beliavsky and Adrian<br />
Mikhalchishin’s The Petrosian<br />
System Against the QID, Andrew<br />
Greet’s Play the Queen’s Indian, Lars<br />
Schandorff’s Playing the Queen’s<br />
Gambit and Valentin Bogdanov’s<br />
latest effort, <strong>Chess</strong> Explained: The<br />
Grünfeld.<br />
New in <strong>Chess</strong> Yearbook 91 is<br />
highly recommended to all those<br />
with a strong interest in opening<br />
theory.<br />
<strong>Northwest</strong> Grand Prix<br />
Administrator<br />
Murlin Varner<br />
13329 208 Ave NE<br />
Woodinville, WA 98072<br />
MEVjr54@yahoo.com 425-882-0102<br />
Need promotional copies of <strong>Northwest</strong><br />
<strong>Chess</strong> for use at chess events?<br />
Contact: Gary Dorfner (WA),<br />
ggarychess@aol.com<br />
or Eric Holcomb (OR),<br />
Eric@Holcomb.com<br />
August 2009 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Page 29
Clark Harmon Memorial<br />
<strong>Northwest</strong> Grand Prix<br />
Murlin Varner, statsmeister<br />
This month’s standings mark the half-way point of the 2009<br />
Grand Prix. All events through the end of June are included. 362<br />
players have made 841 entries into 35 events. These numbers<br />
compare well with past years.<br />
The standings themselves have changed just a little from the<br />
previous month. Once again the Oregon leader in Class D has moved<br />
up to class C, making way for a new name on that list. Just a few<br />
points separate the top players in many classes, and to see a couple<br />
of wide-open races just look at Washington’s class A, where 6.5<br />
points separate first from sixth place, and Oregon’s class D, where<br />
the range is just four points. One other item of significance: for the<br />
first time since I started keeping records, at the half-way point of<br />
the year, there are two Oregon players (Nick Raptis and Steven<br />
Breckenridge) with equal or greater points than the top Washington<br />
payer (Darby Monahan). Considering that three of the next four<br />
events with multipliers are going to be held in Oregon, seems to me<br />
that some Washington players need to make travel plans.<br />
Those four up-coming multiplier events are the Seafair Open in<br />
Seattle (which will occur before you read this), both weekends of<br />
the Oregon Class Championships (August 1-2 and 8-9, both with a<br />
2x multiplier), and the Oregon Open in Gresham (September 7-9,<br />
with a $3000 guaranteed prize fund and a 4x multiplier.) If you<br />
want to really increase your standing in the Grand Prix before the<br />
autumnal equinox, then Oregon is the place to play! There are also<br />
11 other events between July 1 st and Labor Day, in Portland, Seattle,<br />
Spokane and Tacoma. Go, play, get points!<br />
We do not yet have a sponsor providing the added money for<br />
the Grand Prix. Usually, we have had a donor or donors who have<br />
provided $1000 to the prize fund, split evenly between the two<br />
states. This has allowed for the nice sums we have awarded over<br />
the past 10 years or so. We will be awarding prizes this year, have<br />
no fear, but without the sponsor, prizes will be smaller. If you are in<br />
a position to sponsor the 2009 Grand Prix, or know someone who<br />
is, please consider doing so. And it is never too early to think about<br />
the 2010 Grand Prix. Remember, the sponsor gets naming rights.<br />
Oregon<br />
Washington<br />
Masters<br />
1 Raptis, Nick ................ 107.5 1 Sinanan, Joshua ......... 52<br />
2 Roua, Radu ................... 38 2 Collyer, Curt .............. 49.5<br />
3 Haessler, Carl ............... 29 3 Bragg, David ............. 35.5<br />
.......................................... 4 Koons, Nat ................. 18<br />
.......................................... 5 MacGregor, Michael . 17<br />
.......................................... 6 Pupols, Viktors .......... 16<br />
Experts<br />
1 Breckenridge, Steven ... 79 1 Watts, Peter ................ 78<br />
2 Gay, Daniel................... 70 2 Chen, Howard ........... 60<br />
3 Daroza, Eduardo .......... 27.5 3 Bartron, Paul ............. 50<br />
4 Heywood, Bill .............. 21.5 4 Rupel, David ............. 38.5<br />
5 Narayanasamy, Prasanna18 5 Kelley, Dereque ......... 37.5<br />
6 Polasek , Preston .......... 17 6 Merwin, Steve ........... 31.5<br />
Class A<br />
1 Esler, Brian ................... 66 1 Hickey, Patrick .......... 52<br />
2 Fulton, David ............... 54.5 2 Stripes, James ............ 49.5<br />
3 Herrera, Robert............. 43.5 3 Cambareri, Michael ... 47.5<br />
4 Banner, Richard............ 35 4 Rowles, David ........... 46.5<br />
5 Smyth, Scott ................. 33 5 O’Gorman, Peter ....... 45.5<br />
6 Evers, Jason .................. 26.5 5 Gottlieb, Ethan .......... 45.5<br />
Class B<br />
1 Niro, Frank ................... 50 1 McAleer, James ......... 65.5<br />
2 Pyle, Galen ................... 43 2 Ackerman, Ryan ........ 62<br />
3 Grom, Alex ................... 34.5 3 Buck, Stephen............ 60.5<br />
4 Levin, Scott .................. 27.5 4 Walton, John .............. 46<br />
5 Yoshinaga, David ......... 24 5 Elisara, Travis ............ 45.5<br />
6 Frojen, Ken .................. 21 6 Griffin, David ............ 44.5<br />
Class C<br />
1 Tse, Kalen..................... 44.5 1 Monahan, Darby ........ 79<br />
2 Witt, Steven .................. 42.5 2 Piper, August ............. 52<br />
3 Dietz, Arliss .................. 40.5 3 Baker, Ted.................. 49.5<br />
4 Midson, Tony ............... 25 4 Nicoski, Aaron ........... 49<br />
5 Brusselback, Lon.......... 23 5 Grabar, Svetlana ........ 36.5<br />
6 Skalnes, Erik ................ 22 6 Yu, Justin ................... 36<br />
Class D and Below<br />
1 Winter, Dillon ............... 14 1 Richards, Jerrold ....... 65.5<br />
2 James, John E. .............. 12 2 Burney, James............ 48<br />
3 Butson, Jeffrey ............. 11.5 3 Waugh, James ............ 41.5<br />
4 Smith, James K. ........... 10.5 4 Wang, Shanglun ........ 40<br />
5 Barrese, William ........... 10 5 Stewart, A George...... 32.5<br />
5 Moore, Craig ................ 10 6 Two tied ..................... 30<br />
Overall Leaders, by State<br />
1 Raptis, Nick ................ 107.5 1 Monahan, Darby ........ 79<br />
2 Breckenridge, Steven ... 79 2 Watts, Peter ................ 78<br />
3 Gay, Daniel................... 70 3 McAleer, James ......... 65.5<br />
4 Esler, Brian ................... 66 3 Richards, Jerrold ....... 65.5<br />
5 Fulton, David ............... 54.5 5 Ackerman, Ryan ........ 62<br />
6 Niro, Frank ................... 50 6 Buck, Stephen............ 60.5<br />
7 Tse, Kalen..................... 44.5 7 Chen, Howard ........... 60<br />
8 Herrera, Robert............. 43.5 8 Sinanan, Joshua ......... 52<br />
9 Pyle, Galen ................... 43 8 Hickey, Patrick .......... 52<br />
10 Witt, Steven .................. 42.5 8 Piper, August ............. 52<br />
11 Dietz, Arliss .................. 40.5 11 Bartron, Paul ............. 50<br />
12 Roua, Radu ................... 38 12 Collyer, Curt .............. 49.5<br />
13 Banner, Richard............ 35 12 Stripes, James ............ 49.5<br />
14 Grom, Alex ................... 34.5 12 Baker, Ted.................. 49.5<br />
15 Smyth, Scott ................. 33 15 Nicoski, Aaron ........... 49<br />
Players from Other Places<br />
1 Havrilla, Mark ID 1921 74.5<br />
2 Leslie, Cameron ID 1704 56<br />
3 Donaldson, John CA 2426 50<br />
3 McCourt, Daniel MT 1721 44.5<br />
5 Subedi, Avinaya ID 1646 42<br />
6 Martin, Robert MT 1697 41<br />
6 McLaughlin, Edward MT 1750 35<br />
6 Armstrong, Nathan MS 1726 32<br />
6 Davis, Loal MO 2227 30<br />
10 Weyland, Phillip ID 1864 26<br />
10 Harmon-Vellotti, Luke ID 2011 25<br />
10 Weyland, Ronald ID 1599 25<br />
13 Abderhalden, Richard ID 1449 25<br />
14 Li, Changhe CAN 1930 22.5<br />
15 Sly, Douglas CAN 1455 22.5<br />
Page 30 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009
Seattle <strong>Chess</strong> Club<br />
Tournaments<br />
<br />
Address<br />
17517 15 Ave NE<br />
Seattle WA 98155<br />
Infoline<br />
206-417-5405<br />
www.seattlechessclub.info<br />
kleistcf@aol.com<br />
Address for Entries<br />
SCC Tnmt Dir<br />
2420 S 137 St<br />
Seattle WA 98168<br />
<br />
<br />
Aug. 15, Sept. 12<br />
Saturday Quads<br />
Format: 3-RR, 4-plyr sections by rating. TC: G/120. EF: $7 (+$5 fee for<br />
non-SCC). Prizes: Free entry for future quad. Reg: 9:00-9:45 a.m. Rds:<br />
10:00-2:15-ASAP. Misc: USCF, WCF/OCF memb. req’d, OSA. NS, NC.<br />
Aug. 2, 30; Oct. 4<br />
Sunday Tornado<br />
Format: 4-SS. TC: G/64. EF: $17 (+$5 fee for non-SCC). Prizes: 1st 35%,<br />
2nd 27%, Bottom Half 1st 22%, 2nd 16% ($10 from each EF goes to prize<br />
fund). Reg: 10:30-11:15 a.m. Rds: 11:30-1:50-4:10-6:30. Misc: USCF,<br />
WCF/OCF memb. req’d, OSA. NS, NC.<br />
August 16<br />
SCC Novice<br />
Format: 4-SS. Open to U1200 and unrated. TC: G/75. EF: $11 by 8/13,<br />
$16 at site. ($2 disc. for SCC mem., $1 for mem. of other dues-req’d CCs in<br />
WA, OR, & BC). Prizes: Memberships (SCC, WCF, USCF). Reg: 9-<br />
9:45a.m. Rds: 10-12:45-3:30-6. Byes: 1 (Rd 3 or 4–commit at reg.). Misc:<br />
USCF memb. req’d. NS, NC.<br />
Attendance at this year’s previous tournaments<br />
Novice (1/31)–5, (5/2)–8; Quads (1/10)–10, (2/21)–20, (3/14)–<br />
17, (4/25)–14, (5/16)–15, (6/13)–20; Tornados (1/4)–12, (2/1)–<br />
12, (3/1)–16, (4/5)–14, (5/3)–18, (5/31)–19, (7/5)–18; Seattle<br />
City Championship (1/16-18)–21; Seattle Spring Open (3/27-<br />
29)–36; Green Open II (5/9-10)–26; Emerald City Open (6/19-<br />
21)–46.<br />
SCC Championship<br />
Sept. 11, 18, Oct. 2, 9, 23, 30, Nov. 6<br />
Format: 7-rd Swiss held on Friday evenings. TC:<br />
35/100 and 25/60. EF: $28 if rec’d by 9/9, $35<br />
thereafter. SCC memb. req’d — special $24 tnmt<br />
memb. Prize fund: 75% of EFs. Prizes: 23%-<br />
16%, U2000 9%, U1800 8%, U1600 7%, U1400<br />
6%, Unrated 3%, Endurance 3%. Reg: Fri. 7-7:45<br />
p.m. Rds: Fridays 8 p.m. Make-up Games/Alternate<br />
Schedule for Rds 1-3: Sat. Oct 3 (11-<br />
2:30-6)—3 make-up (G/90) games; Wed. Oct. 7 (8<br />
p.m.)—1 make-up (G/75) game. Byes: 4 (1 in rds<br />
5-7, commit by 10/9). Misc: USCF memb. req’d.<br />
NS. NC.<br />
Our Move<br />
The SCC is close to signing a lease for<br />
1800 sq. ft. in the Northway Square East<br />
Building (2150 N 107 th St) just across<br />
the freeway from Northgate Mall.<br />
Seattle Fall Open<br />
September 25-27 or September 26-27<br />
A 2-section, 5-round Swiss chess tournament with a time<br />
control of 40/2 & SD/1 (except Rd 1 of the 2-day option<br />
— G/64) with a prize fund of $1000 based on 58 paid<br />
entries, 6 per prize group.<br />
A Harmon Memorial Grand Prix event<br />
Open: $180 gtd-$120 gtd, U2200<br />
$100, U2000 $95, U1800 $90<br />
Reser<br />
eserve (U1700): $110-$80, U1550<br />
$70, U1450 $65, U1350 $60, UNR $30<br />
Entry Fees: $33 by 9/23, $42 at site. SCC members –subtract<br />
$9. Members of other dues-req’d CCs in BC, OR, &<br />
WA – subtract $4. Unrated players FREE with purchase of<br />
1-yr USCF & WCF. Add $1 for 2-day option. Make checks<br />
payable to SCC.<br />
Registration: Fri. 7-7:45 pm or Sat. 9-9:45 am. Rounds:<br />
Fri. 8 pm, Sat. (10@G/64)-12:30-6:45, Sun. 11-5.<br />
Byes: 2 available. Rounds 4 or 5 must commit at registration.<br />
Misc.: USCF & WCF required. NS. NC.<br />
August 2009 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> Page 31
Future Events<br />
indicates a NW Grand Prix event <br />
For free adult and scholastic tournament listings, please visit www.nwchess.com.<br />
August 1 – 2, 8 – 9<br />
Oregon Class Championships <br />
Site: Portland <strong>Chess</strong> Club, 8205 SW 24th Ave, Portland OR 97219. August 1-2, Classes M/X, B, & D; August 8-9, Classes A, C, & E.<br />
See full-page ad in the July issue for more details, or visit http://www.nwchess.com or http://www.pdxchess.org.<br />
August 6, 13, 20<br />
August Ajeeb <br />
Site: Spokane <strong>Chess</strong> Club, Gonzaga University, Room 121 Herak Building. Format: 3-RR, quads. TC: G/120. Rds: Thursday evenings.<br />
EF: $16.Reg: Aug 6, 6:30-7:15 pm. Misc: USCF & WCF membership required. Info/Entries: Spokane CC, c/o David B. Griffin, PO<br />
Box 631, Spokane Valley, WA 99037; 509-928-3260, cell 509-994-9739.<br />
August 8<br />
Washington Blitz Championship<br />
Site: Crossroads Shopping Center, 15600 NE 8th St, Bellevue, WA, 98008. Reg: check-in from 11:30 –noon; first round ASAP. Awards<br />
ASAP after last round (est. 3:30 p.m.) Format: 7-round double; game/5. K-12 Scholastic Open & Championship Open sections. Prizes:<br />
60% of entries go to prize fund. Cash prize for Championship Open sections, including junior under 21 player. Trophies & medals for top<br />
scholastic finishers. EF: $15 Scholastic tournament fee; changes to $20 day before tournament. Tournament special discounted WCF<br />
membership (including NW <strong>Chess</strong> magazine) required to play in open section of the tournament; $10. No membership required for<br />
scholastic section. Misc: please bring a clock if you have one. <strong>Chess</strong> sets are provided. Info/Entries: online at chess4life.com, in person<br />
at <strong>Chess</strong>4Life, or by calling 425-283-0549. E-mail: tournaments@chess4life.com.<br />
August 8 – 9<br />
Tacoma Open <br />
Site: Tacoma <strong>Chess</strong> Club, 409 Puyallup Ave E, 2nd floor, room 11. In the DTI Soccer Store bldg, across the street from Alfred’s Cafe, two<br />
blocks down the hill from the Tacoma Dome. Format: 5-SS, 1 section. TC: G/120. Rds: Sat 10, 2:30, 7. Sun 10, 3 (or ASAP). EF:<br />
Adults $30/$40, Juniors $20/$25, Economy $15. Unrated players free with purchase of USCF and WCF memberships. Prizes: 67% fullpay<br />
EFs, 1st 25%; 1st top 1/3, 15%; 1st mid 1/3, 14%; 1st bottom 1/3, 13%. If fewer than 9 full-paid entries, then two groups. Reg: Sat,<br />
9:00-9:45am. Bye: Two 1/2 point byes okay rounds 1-4. Misc: USCF & WCF membership required. If ten or fewer players, then it will<br />
be a one-day tournament. Info/Entries: Gary J. Dorfner, 8423 E. B St. Tacoma, WA 98445 or call (253)535-2536 or (253)306-7137<br />
(club), e-mail ggarychess@aol.com.<br />
August 29<br />
PCC Game-in-60 <br />
Site: Portland <strong>Chess</strong> Club, 8205 SW 24th Ave, Portland OR 97219. Format: 4-SS TC: G/60. May switch to 5-SS and G/45 if entries<br />
> 25. EF: $20, $5 disc for PCC memb. No adv ent. Prizes: $$200 b/20. $60-40-30, U1800 35, U1500 35. Reg: 9-9:30 am. Byes: 1 HPB<br />
if req at reg. Misc: USCF & OCF/WCF memb req, OSA. Info: portlandchessclub@gmail.com, 503-246-2978, www.pdxchess.org.<br />
August 29 – 30<br />
Washington Senior Adult Championship<br />
Site: Tacoma <strong>Chess</strong> Club, 409 Puyallup Ave E, 2nd floor, room 11. In the DTI Soccer Store bldg, across the street from Alfred’s Cafe, two<br />
blocks down the hill from the Tacoma Dome. Format: 4-SS for those age 50+. TC: G/120. Reg: 9:00-9:45 am. Rds: sat. 10:00, 3:30,<br />
sun. 10:00, 3:30 or ASAP. EF: $20.00. Prizes: $200.00 (b/10) 1st $70.00, 2nd $50.00, 1st u1800 u1500 $40.00 (if more than 10 entries<br />
then prizes will be increased). Winner seeded into the Washington Championship Invitational section. Bye: Two 1/2 point byes available.<br />
USCF & NW memberships required. Entries/info: Gary J. Dorfner, 8423 E. B St., Tacoma, WA 98445. Phone (253) 535-2536, e-mail<br />
ggarychess@aol.com. Make checks payable to Gary Dorfner.<br />
August 29 – 30<br />
Washington Women’s Championship<br />
Site: Tacoma <strong>Chess</strong> Club, 409 Puyallup Ave E, 2nd floor, room 11. In the DTI Soccer Store bldg, across the street from Alfred’s Cafe, two<br />
blocks down the hill from the Tacoma Dome. Format: 4-SS (all ages, women only). TC: G/120. Reg: 9:00-9:45 am. Rds: Sat. 10:00,<br />
3:30, sun. 10:00, 3:30 or ASAP. EF: $20.00. Prizes: $200.00 (b/10) 1st $70.00,2nd $50.00,1st u1800, u1500 $40.00. (if more than 10<br />
entries then prizes will be increased). Winner seeded into the Washington Championship Invitational section. Bye: Two 1/2 point byes<br />
available. Misc: USCF & NW memberships required. Entries/info: Gary J. Dorfner, 8423 E. B St., Tacoma, WA 98445. Phone (253)<br />
535-2536, e-mail ggarychess@aol.com. Make checks payable to Gary Dorfner.<br />
Page 32 <strong>Northwest</strong> <strong>Chess</strong> August 2009